Arbitr
Use cases▾
Generic environmental claimsAI interaction disclosureAccessibility statement and conformity
Pay range in job postings
Prescribed risk warning in promotions
Auto-renewal and cancellation disclosure
Content localisation
AI discoverability
PlatformPricing
Resources▾
Blog
About▾
CompanyCareers
Book a demo
Home > Use cases > Accessibility statement (EU)

Your accessibility statement says you conform. Do you?

It's been live since the day you published it. Since then there's been 4 new releases, a new checkout and a rebuilt booking form. Has anyone gone back to check it's still accurate?

Trusted by
Oracle
Entrata
Trane Technologies
Ingersoll Rand
IBM
Spirax Sarco
SEAT
Varian
Mitutoyo
Panasonic
Oracle
Entrata
Trane Technologies
Ingersoll Rand
IBM
Spirax Sarco
SEAT
Varian
Mitutoyo
Panasonic
European Accessibility Act · Directive (EU) 2019/882 and national transpositions

Since 28 June 2025, covered digital services sold to EU consumers have to be accessible, and have to say so.

In force since
28 Jun 2025
Applies to
Ecommerce, banking, transport, telecoms and digital services
Includes
Non-EU sellers
What it requires
A published statement of conformity
The statement is the part everyone did. It is also the part that goes out of date.
How it drifts

Nothing broke. You just shipped.

An accessibility statement is accurate on the day it is signed. What makes it false is ordinary product work, done by people who have never read it.
A release

A checkout step rebuilt with a new form component.

What brokeField labels no longer read out.
The statement still says fully conformant.
A rebrand

New brand palette applied across the site.

What brokeBody text contrast fell below the threshold.
The statement still says fully conformant.
A feature

A booking flow gained a modal.

What brokeKeyboard focus is trapped inside it.
The statement still says fully conformant.
3.4%

Of large French company websites reviewed in June 2025, only 3.4% were accessible. (Federation of Blind and Partially Sighted People of France)

Market by market

One statement per market. All of them saying the same thing.

The requirement applies in every member state you sell into, and each transposition has its own version of it. Most companies publish one statement, translate it, and never revisit any of them.
Declared · Mar 2025
Fully conformant
Signed · Group compliance
→
01IrelandPass
02NetherlandsNo statement
03SpainEnglish only
Held04 · Germany
EU ACCESSIBILITY ACT - DECLARED CONFORMITYDeclared fully conformant · Mar 2025. Since the statement was signed there have been four releases. Checkout step three lost its field labels, the booking flow gained a keyboard trap, and the rebrand dropped body contrast below the threshold. The statement has not been amended.
12
Markets you sell into
9
Statements published
1
Still accurate
See your accessibility statements checked.
Book a demo
The platform

How it works

You already have the standard. It is published, it is testable, and it has not changed. What you do not have is anything watching the drift between what your site actually does today, and what your statement says it does.
The old way

Slow, manual review

Send the file to human reviewers. Wait. Pay by the word. Find out what changed after it published.

With Arbitr

Content governance as a platform

Your rules run against every change before it goes live, in every market, at the speed of AI.

How a check runs

Whether it is a web page, a purchase path or a published declaration, everything runs through the same three stages.

STAGE 01

Checks

Pages are read against the published standard and against what you have declared.

Output · a decision per page
→
STAGE 02

Flags

Anything that breaks a rule is held and the rule that held it is named, so the person who has to fix it knows what to change and who can approve it.

Output · a hold, with a reason
→
STAGE 03

Publishes

What passes goes live in the market it was written for, and the decision stays on the record.

Output · live content, and an audit trail

A hold is not a block. It is the product working, and it comes with a named owner and a next step.

See the platform in full ›The trust layer between AI and your live systems.
Remediation and governance

Fix today. Then stay that way.

Two jobs, in order. First we go through what you have declared, market by market, and find where the statement no longer matches the site.

What we find is routed rather than reported. Each failure comes with the standard it breaches and who can act on it, and goes to your team or into our expert network to be corrected.

Then we stay on. Every release, every rebrand and every new feature is another chance for the declaration to go false.

Correcting today's statement is finite work. Every release after it is not.

Proof

How we help

37,000
Expert reviewers who correct what the check finds, in every market you publish in
25+
Years working with regulated multinationals on multilingual content
IBM Gold Partner
Technology partner
FAQ

Questions we get asked

Have a market or surface this page has not covered? Tell us what you've declared, and where.

Ask a pricing question ↗
We know our site is not fully accessible. Isn't publishing that worse?
No. A statement of partial conformity that accurately describes what is and is not covered is a compliant statement. A statement of full conformity that is not true is the problem. Saying less, accurately, is the stronger position.
Our statement is in English. Do we need one per market?
Can Arbitr fix the accessibility problems it finds?
We use an accessibility overlay. Does that cover us?
How much does it cost?
See your accessibility statements checked.
Book a demo