Legal

Accessibility Statement

Last updated: 31 July 2026 · Last reviewed: 31 July 2026

At a glance

  • We aim for WCAG 2.1 Level AA. Today we are partially conformant — most of it holds, some of it does not, and the gaps are listed below rather than glossed over.
  • Every page works by keyboard, every control has a visible focus ring, every image carries alt text, and animation respects your reduced-motion setting.
  • The main known gap is colour contrast on our faintest grey text, which measures 4.41:1 against a 4.5:1 requirement.
  • There is no “skip to content” link and no <main> landmark on most pages yet. Both are on the fix list.
  • Found something we have missed? Email [email protected] — we reply within 5 business days.

1. Our commitment

SOCIALFUEL.IO is built by Helou Holdings Pty Ltd (ACN 163 489 629, ABN 43 163 489 629) trading as SOCIALFUEL™. We want the product to be usable by as many people as possible, including people who browse with a keyboard only, use a screen reader or magnifier, need larger text, or prefer reduced motion.

We treat accessibility as part of building the product rather than as a compliance exercise bolted on afterwards. That also means being straight about where we currently fall short, which is what section 4 is for.

2. Conformance status

We measure ourselves against the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 at Level AA.

Our current status is partially conformant. In WCAG’s own language that means most of the content meets Level AA, but some parts do not. We have deliberately not claimed full conformance, because we have measured specific failures and they are still open. Those failures are listed individually below with their measured values.

3. What currently works

These were verified on the live build on 31 July 2026, across the home page, pricing page, blog and comparison pages:

  • Keyboard access. Every interactive control is reachable and operable by keyboard, in a logical order. There are no keyboard traps.
  • Visible focus. Every focusable element we sampled shows a visible focus indicator; we do not strip focus outlines.
  • Text alternatives. All images carry an alt attribute, and decorative graphics are hidden from assistive technology rather than announced as noise.
  • Named controls. Every button, link and form field has an accessible name, so screen readers announce a purpose rather than “button”.
  • Reduced motion. If your system asks for reduced motion, our scroll and reveal animations are disabled.
  • Zoom and reflow. Pinch-zoom is never disabled, and pages reflow down to a 390 px viewport without horizontal scrolling.
  • Language and structure. Every page declares its language and has exactly one top-level heading.

4. Where we fall short

These are real, measured, and open as at 31 July 2026. We would rather list them than let you discover them.

  • Contrast on our faintest text (WCAG 1.4.3). Our secondary grey text measures 4.41:1 against the 4.5:1 minimum for normal-size text — narrowly short. Smaller labels, timestamps and fine print use fainter greys still, measuring roughly 3.0:1 to 4.0:1. This affects captions, eyebrow labels, footer fine print and some table values across the site. Headings, body copy and buttons are unaffected.
  • No “skip to content” link on most pages (WCAG 2.4.1). Keyboard and screen-reader users must tab through the navigation rather than jumping straight to the content. This page carries one; the rest of the site does not yet.
  • Missing <main> landmark on most pages (WCAG 1.3.1). Most pages expose navigation and footer landmarks but not a main-content landmark, so “jump to main” in a screen reader does not work as it should. This page is the exception.
  • Heading levels skip a step (WCAG 1.3.1). On the blog and comparison pages the outline jumps from a level-2 heading to a level-4 heading, which makes the document outline harder to navigate by headings.
  • Third-party and generated content. Advertising creatives shown in search results come from public ad libraries and carry whatever alt text, captions and contrast the original advertiser used. We cannot correct the accessibility of someone else’s ad. Likewise, AI-generated analysis is text we can style but not fully predict.
  • Not formally audited. We have not yet commissioned an independent third-party accessibility audit, and we have not tested with the full range of assistive technologies (see section 6).

5. How we assessed this

This statement is based on a self-assessment carried out on 31 July 2026 by the SOCIALFUEL team, combining automated checks with manual testing in a real browser.

We checked language declaration, page titles, heading structure, text alternatives, accessible names for controls, landmark regions, keyboard reachability and focus visibility, reduced-motion support, zoom and reflow behaviour, and colour contrast. Contrast was calculated on composited colours — translucent text layered onto the actual background behind it — because measuring a semi-transparent colour as if it were opaque produces flattering numbers that are simply wrong.

A self-assessment is not an independent audit, and we say so plainly rather than implying certification we do not hold.

6. Technical information

Accessibility of SOCIALFUEL.IO relies on the following technologies:

  • HTML, CSS, JavaScript and WAI-ARIA

The application requires JavaScript. Our public marketing and blog pages are server-rendered and remain readable without it, but the product itself does not currently offer a non-JavaScript mode.

We develop and test primarily in current versions of Chrome, Safari, Firefox and Edge on desktop and mobile. We have not yet completed structured testing with JAWS, NVDA or VoiceOver, so we cannot make specific claims about those screen readers. If you use one and hit a wall, please tell us — that feedback is more useful to us than any automated report.

7. Tell us about a barrier

If any part of SOCIALFUEL.IO stops you doing what you came to do, we want to hear about it — including the things not listed above.

It helps if you can tell us the page, what you were trying to do, and what assistive technology, browser and operating system you were using — but please get in touch even if you cannot, rather than not writing at all.

We aim to acknowledge within 5 business days and to tell you either how to work around the barrier or when we expect to fix it. If a fix will take time, we will say so honestly instead of leaving you waiting.

8. If we do not resolve it

If you are not satisfied with our response, you may escalate. In Australia, complaints about disability discrimination can be made to the Australian Human Rights Commission. Users elsewhere may have equivalent bodies under local law, such as national enforcement bodies under the European Accessibility Act or an ADA complaint in the United States.

9. Keeping this current

We review this statement whenever we make significant changes to the interface, and at least once a year. The “Last reviewed” date at the top reflects the most recent assessment, not merely the last time the wording was edited — a statement whose known-issues list has gone stale is worse than no statement at all, because people rely on it to decide whether this product will work for them.

10. Contact

© 2026 SOCIALFUEL™ · ABN 43 163 489 629. All rights reserved.