Service · fixed fee

Accessibility fixed in the code — audited, re-tested, documented

Code-level WCAG 2.2 AA remediation — not an overlay — with audit, re-test, conformance statement and VPAT. Prices published.

Accessibility exposure now arrives three ways: US lawsuits (running at a record pace in 2026), the European Accessibility Act in force since , and procurement teams demanding a VPAT. The answer to all three is the same: fix the code against WCAG 2.2 AA, re-test, and document — from $2,500 audit.

$2,500 audit· audit 2 weeks · remediation 2–6 weeks

Half on start, half on delivery of the evidence pack. Milestone billing above $8,000. Evidence pack or no fee: every engagement ends with a dated evidence pack. If I don’t deliver it, you don’t pay the closing half.

Email the deskFull price ladder →

What is this for, exactly?

Businesses facing an accessibility demand letter or lawsuit, an EAA obligation, or a procurement team asking for a VPAT.

What do you get?

  • WCAG 2.2 AA audit with a defect list prioritised by exposure — $2,500
  • Code remediation: semantic HTML, keyboard operability, focus management, contrast, forms — $4,000–12,000 by page count
  • VPAT / Accessibility Conformance Report, every criterion with a specific remark — $1,200 simple · $2,500 standard · $5,000+ complex or government-facing
  • Re-test and conformance statement, plus a dated record of remediation effort — $1,000

Why not an overlay widget?

Because the people filing lawsuits read code, not marketing. The July 2026 filings are the argument, and each figure below carries its source.

US web accessibility litigation, July 2026

An overlay is a subscription to the appearance of a fix. Remediation in the code is the fix.

What does the ladder look like in practice?

The audit ($2,500) produces a defect list ranked by real exposure — keyboard traps and unlabelled forms before cosmetic contrast notes. Remediation is quoted fixed from that list, by page count. The re-test proves the defects are closed, and the conformance statement plus remediation record give your counsel or your buyer the document they asked for. Each rung is priced on the pricing page — no bundle you didn't choose.

Is this site itself accessible?

It had better be. This site targets WCAG 2.2 AA, works without JavaScript, is fully keyboard-operable, honours reduced-motion preferences, and publishes an accessibility statement naming the standard, the state of conformance and a contact for problems. The body face is Atkinson Hyperlegible Next, designed by the Braille Institute for low-vision readers. A desk selling accessibility that cannot pass its own audit deserves the thirty-second disqualification that would follow.

What does the price not include?

Stated before you ask, because a fixed price is only fixed if its edges are published.

  • No overlay widgets, ever — the 2026 filing data shows defendants running them are sued anyway
  • No legal advice and no litigation strategy — the remediation record is written for your counsel to use
  • Target standard is WCAG 2.2 AA, stated with version and date in every deliverable

Which deadlines does this answer?

  1. in forceEuropean Accessibility Act
  2. continuousADA Title III — web accessibility litigation
  3. upcomingADA Title II — web and mobile accessibility rule

Questions buyers actually ask

We installed an accessibility widget. Are we covered?

The filing data says no: in July 2026 alone, 113 of the 401 businesses sued were already running a widget when the lawsuit arrived. Widgets overlay symptoms; lawsuits cite the underlying code. This desk fixes the code, and will not sell or install an overlay.

We just received a demand letter. What should we do first?

Talk to your counsel first — the letter is a legal matter and the response strategy is theirs. What I provide, usually at counsel’s request, is the technical side: an audit with defects ranked by exposure, the code remediation, a re-test, and a dated record of remediation effort for the settlement conversation.

Procurement asked us for a VPAT. What is that, and how fast can it exist?

A Voluntary Product Accessibility Template — the standard conformance report enterprise and government buyers request before purchasing software. A credible one requires an audit first; the VPAT then records, criterion by criterion, what supports, what partially supports, and what does not, with a specific remark for every non-full result. Audit plus VPAT is typically four to five weeks end to end.

Which standard do you audit against — 2.1 or 2.2?

WCAG 2.2 AA, stated with version and date in every deliverable. 2.2 contains everything in 2.1, so work done against it also answers obligations still written against 2.1 — the US Title II rule among them — without betting your remediation on a standard that is being superseded.

Does the EAA apply to us if we’re not in the EU?

The directive covers products and services sold on the EU market regardless of where the seller sits — but whether your offering is in scope is a legal question for your counsel, and I won’t pretend otherwise. What I can give you is the technical state of your site against the standard, in writing, so that conversation starts from facts.

Last reviewed· Every dated claim on this page links to its source.

Which obligation is closest?

Tell me the deadline you are looking at and what your site does. You get a straight answer about whether it applies to you, and a fixed price if it does.

Email the deskSee every date

Direct to hello@sophura.com · one person, named, who answers. I don’t give legal advice.