We Consider Ourselves Low Risk: What Web Tests Miss
I was recently invited to submit a proposal to a large global SaaS platform. Their digital team had reached out directly. They were fully aware of the accessibility issues their platform was facing. They had thousands of users across Europe and beyond. They knew about the EAA. They knew that aa web accessibility was not optional. I became the recommended supplier. The process looked promising. Then two months passed in silence. When they finally replied, it was through their legal team. Their decision? They considered themselves low risk and would not approve the budget. The team were told to run web tests, fix what they could, and move on.
What Web Tests Do And What They Miss
Web tests are commonly used to scan websites for accessibility errors. They identify missing alt text, low contrast, missing labels, or broken ARIA roles. These are all important. However, web tests are automated and limited. They cannot detect issues like confusing tab order, unclear navigation, or hidden focus traps. They do not check whether interactive elements are announced correctly by a screen reader. They do not understand context or meaning. This is where they fall short of the standards set by aa web accessibility.
Relying on web tests alone is like checking a book for spelling errors without reading it. You might catch typos, but you will miss unclear sentences, bad structure, or missing chapters. Accessibility is not just about what is visible to automated tools. It is about the full user experience.
Being The Preferred Supplier Still Was Not Enough
The digital team at this company had done everything right. They raised the issue internally. They documented the risks. They reviewed accessibility audit providers and chose us. We had the plan: real-user testing, manual analysis, a written accessibility statement, and a clear roadmap to compliance. The work would have addressed the requirements of the European Accessibility Act. It would have supported the legal team, not burdened them. And yet their response was to say no.
This is the pattern we see far too often. Digital leaders know what is needed. They understand the gaps left by basic web tests. They push for proper testing. Then legal or procurement intervene with a risk-based assessment. If there have been no lawsuits, if no one has yet complained, they assume nothing needs to change. The irony is that this decision — to delay — is what creates the risk.
Low Risk Is Not The Same As No Risk
Many legal departments interpret low risk to mean no action is needed. This is a misunderstanding. The absence of complaints does not mean the experience is acceptable. Many users simply leave, silently. Others do not know they have the right to complain. Others try, fail, and give up. When companies run only automated web tests, they get a false sense of security. They see green ticks and think they are protected. They are not.
Under the European Accessibility Act, aa web accessibility is a requirement — not a suggestion. It covers digital services, platforms, e-commerce systems, ticketing, and more. Companies that delay compliance because they believe the risk is low are ignoring the shift in legislation, procurement expectations, and public awareness. Once enforcement begins, it will not be enough to say you ran a few web tests. You will need evidence of real effort and real testing.
Web Tests Cannot Replace Disabled Users
At Accessibility Audit, our audits are performed by real disabled users. These include blind screen reader users, keyboard-only testers, people with cognitive access needs, and others who rely on assistive technology. We watch, record, and analyse how they interact with your website. The insights gained from this process are entirely different from anything automated. A menu that looks fine in a scan may be impossible to use with a screen reader. A form with all the right fields may still be unusable if the error messages do not announce correctly. These are real problems, experienced by real people, and missed by web tests every time.
What The Data Does Not Show - Web Tests And Accessibility Risk
Automated web tests provide a percentage score or a pass/fail result. What they do not show is frustration. They do not capture the emotional impact of being excluded. They do not reflect how many users abandon the process before completing a task. They do not show how your brand is being perceived by those who are left out. If your platform is failing aa web accessibility but you are not aware, then you are losing users — you just do not know it.
The Illusion Of Compliance Given By Web Tests
Companies often run internal web tests and believe they are compliant. This illusion is dangerous. We have reviewed platforms with perfect Lighthouse scores that were completely inaccessible in practice. The tests passed because the code appeared clean. The experience failed because the journey was broken. Aa web accessibility is not measured in code quality alone. It is measured by whether someone with a disability can successfully complete the task they came for.
Why Legal Teams Must Rethink Risk
Accessibility is no longer a grey area. Regulations are specific. Requirements are clear. The EU has set out exactly what must be done. When legal teams reduce accessibility to a line-item on a risk matrix, they are failing to see the wider picture. A non-compliant platform can result in reputational damage, financial penalties, lost tenders, customer loss, and internal friction. The cost of doing nothing will soon exceed the cost of doing it properly. Web tests will not protect against that. A structured audit, built on real evidence, will.
We Offer More Than Just Reports
Our audits do not stop at detection. We provide an actionable roadmap. We deliver a fully compliant accessibility statement. We offer support in writing internal policies. We train teams. And we remain available for retesting. Web tests are passive. Our audits are proactive. They are built to reduce legal risk, improve user experience, and support long-term change. If your organisation is relying on tools alone, it is not prepared for what is coming.
The Importance Of AA Web Accessibility
Meeting aa web accessibility standards is now the baseline. This includes clear heading structure, readable fonts, meaningful link text, sufficient colour contrast, keyboard operability, and screen reader compatibility. These are not just technical details. They are ethical and legal obligations. They make your website usable for a wider audience. If your web tests are not checking all of these, they are not enough.
A Call To Action - Do Not Rely On Automated Web Tests
If you are reading this and you are in a position of influence, please do not settle for minimum effort. Learn what digital accessibility truly involves. Understand the limitations of web tests. Recognise the responsibility that comes with offering a digital product or service. Then book a free consultation and take the first step. We are not here to judge — we are here to help.
This Is Not Just About One Company
The story shared here is not unique. It reflects a wider pattern. Organisations delay, hoping web tests will be enough. But they will not be. And the cost of delay is rising. We will keep telling the truth. We will keep offering support. And we will keep working with those who want to get this right.