AssaypostPrecious metals bought by post
Request a labelSend a photo on WhatsApp
Menu

Legal

Accessibility statement

Anyone should be able to read an offer and sell to us without needing help to work the website. We build to WCAG 2.2 level AA. This page says what has been done, what has been tested and what has not.

1. The standard we are working to

  1. 1.1We are working to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.2 at level AA. We are not claiming to have reached it: clause 3.2 says what has been measured and clause 3.3 says what measurement cannot tell you. Where this statement says something has been tested, there is a run behind it in the project's verification log, not an intention.
  2. 1.2Underneath the standard sits a duty. The Equality Act 2010 requires a service provider to make reasonable adjustments so that a disabled person is not put at a substantial disadvantage in using a service. That duty is anticipatory: it does not wait for you to ask. Section 5 is how it is discharged when the website itself is the obstacle, and it applies whether or not anything on this page turns out to be broken.
  3. 1.3This statement is specific on purpose. A statement that cannot be checked is worth no more than no statement, and we would rather you were able to catch us out.

2. What is built in

  1. 2.1The first thing a keyboard reaches on every page is a skip link to the main content. Everything after it can be reached and operated by keyboard alone, and whatever holds focus is ringed in a thick amber outline that stands clear of the page rather than sitting tight against it.
  2. 2.2Buttons, links outside running text, form fields and menu triggers are at least 24 pixels in both directions, and the ones you tap most are drawn to 44. Headings run in order without gaps, so a screen-reader user can move through a page by structure rather than by guessing.
  3. 2.3If your system asks for reduced motion, the site honours it and animation and transitions stop. Colour is never the only thing carrying meaning, tables have captions and proper header cells, and form errors are tied to the field they belong to with your answers left in place.
  4. 2.4Every form on the site is built to work with JavaScript switched off, including the one that takes photographs. The forms are not taking submissions at present, and the contact page gives the routes that are working. Text can be enlarged to 200 per cent, and pages reflow at 320 pixels wide without anything sliding off sideways.

3. What has been tested, and how

  1. 3.1Every page template is checked automatically before each release, at eight screen widths from 320 to 1920 pixels, and the results go into the project's verification log rather than into a sentence on this page.
  2. 3.2Precisely what runs, so that you can hold us to it. The axe accessibility engine, against the WCAG 2.0 A and AA, WCAG 2.1 A and AA and WCAG 2.2 AA rule sets, on every route, at 375, 768 and 1280 pixels. At all eight widths: no sideways overflow, exactly one first-level heading per page, every image carrying alternative text, every interactive target at least 24 pixels in both directions, body copy never under 16 pixels on a phone, and no errors in the browser console. Then, beyond what an engine can assert, a hand-written suite covers what axe cannot see. The skip link is the first stop. Keyboard order follows visual order. The mobile menu releases focus on Escape and does not trap it. Focus is never hidden behind the sticky masthead. Heading and landmark structure is real rather than styled. Form errors are tied to their fields, are announced, and leave your answers in place. A status region exists before it has anything to say. The four WCAG text-spacing values can be applied without anything sliding off sideways.
  3. 3.3What those runs do not cover, because saying so is the useful half. Non-text contrast is not asserted by the engine. Heading order per template, the wording of page titles and descriptions, and behaviour in Safari are not covered by any test. And none of it is evidence about a real person finishing a real sale.

No person has audited this site yet

Automated tools find only some accessibility problems. They cannot tell you whether a page makes sense read aloud, whether an instruction is clear, or whether a screen-reader user can actually finish a sale. No independent audit involving people who use assistive technology has been carried out yet. When one has, this statement will be rewritten around what it finds, and we are not claiming full conformance until then.

4. Known limitations

  1. 4.1Photographs you upload are not described by us, though the written assessment says in words what we can see in them.
  2. 4.2An offer sent as a PDF may not be fully tagged for screen readers. The same figures are always available as a web page or as plain text in an email if you ask.
  3. 4.3Nothing on the site has yet been checked against a braille display or a speech-input tool.

5. Getting the same service another way

  1. 5.1No part of selling to us depends on being able to use this website comfortably. Tell us through the contact page what would work better for you and we will do it that way: an offer read out to you, sent in large print by post, or described piece by piece rather than set out as a document. If you would rather someone else dealt with us on your behalf, say so and we will correspond with them, once we have your written authority.

6. Tell us what is wrong

  1. 6.1If something here is hard to use, we would rather hear it than not. Say what page it was and what happened, and we will either fix it or get you the same information another way while we do. You will get a written reply saying which of those two we are doing, and an unfixed report stays on the list rather than being closed because it was answered. If you are unhappy with our response, the complaints process applies, and you can also contact the Equality Advisory and Support Service, which advises on the Equality Act 2010, at equalityadvisoryservice.com.

Version 0.3.2 · 24 September 2026 · Next review by 24 September 2027, or sooner on any release that changes a page template · Drafted in-house, from test runs recorded in the project's verification log. Not yet read by a qualified adviser, and not yet audited by anyone who uses assistive technology.

  • 0.3.2 — 24 September 2026. Wording only; nothing this statement commits us to has changed. Clause 3.2 was a single 103-word sentence — the longest on the site, on the page that says it would rather you were able to catch us out — and is now several short ones listing the same checks. The date at the head of this page is now taken from this version line rather than from the file's own history, so the two can no longer disagree.
  • 0.3.1 — 21 September 2026. Clause 1.3 no longer makes a claim about other businesses' websites that we could not show you. The note under clause 3.3 no longer quotes a share of problems that automated tools catch, and it now says plainly that no audit by people who use assistive technology has been done, instead of saying one was planned before a launch that has already happened. Clause 2.4 now says that the forms are not taking submissions at present.
  • 0.3 — 19 September 2026. Section 1 added: the standard, the Equality Act duty behind it, and why this statement is specific. Clause 3.2 now names the rule sets, the widths and the hand-written checks instead of describing them in general terms, and clause 3.3 says what the runs do not cover. The review cycle and this history added.
  • 0.2 — 19 September 2026. First version to carry a version line. The claim of conformance withdrawn in favour of a stated target and a note that no person has audited the site.