Accessibility Statement for 2017 Appeals Portal

Updated 24 January 2020

[Note: use this section to make a brief, general statement about what the website allows disabled users to do. Base it on the evaluation covered in detail in the ‘Technical information about this website’s accessibility’ section. If you’re not confident that something is accurate, leave it out. If you’re not confident enough to say anything specific here, leave this section out completely.]

This website is run by Valuation Tribunal Service. We want as many people as possible to be able to use this website. For example, that means you should be able to:

  • change contrast levels and fonts does this need to be done in a settings page or is it ok respond to changes from graphics card display settings
  • zoom in up to 300% without the text spilling off the screen
  • navigate most of the website using just a keyboard
  • navigate most of the website using speech recognition software Untested
  • listen to most of the website using a screen reader (including Jaws 16, NVDA and VoiceOver)

We’ve also made the website text as simple as possible to understand.

AbilityNet has advice on making your device easier to use if you have a disability.

How accessible this website is

[Note: use this section to provide information that a disabled user can act on - for example, avoid a particular section of the website, or request an alternative version rather than waste time trying to make it work with their assistive technology. Try to list in order of most impact to least impact.]

We know some parts of this website are not fully accessible:

  • you cannot modify the line height or spacing of text Zoom changes this, is this acceptable?
  • you cannot skip to the main content when using a screen reader Untested

What to do if you cannot access parts of this website

If you need information on this website in a different format like accessible PDF, large print, easy read, audio recording or braille:

  • email ceo.office@valuationtribunal.gov.uk
  • call 020 7426 3900
  • Valuation Tribunal Service, 2nd Floor, 120 Leman Street, London E1 8EU

We’ll consider your request and get back to you in 5 Working days.

If you cannot view the map on our ‘Contact us’ page, call or email us for directions.

Reporting accessibility problems with this website

We’re always looking to improve the accessibility of this website. If you find any problems not listed on this page or think we’re not meeting accessibility requirements, contact:

  • email ceo.office@valuationtribunal.gov.uk
  • call 020 7426 3900
  • Valuation Tribunal Service, 2nd Floor, 120 Leman Street, London E1 8EU

Enforcement procedure

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is responsible for enforcing the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018 (the ‘accessibility regulations’). If you’re not happy with how we respond to your complaint, contact the Equality Advisory and Support Service (EASS).

[Note: if your organisation is based in Northern Ireland, refer users who want to complain to the Equalities Commission for Northern Ireland (ECNI) instead of the EASS and EHRC.]

Contacting us by phone or visiting us in person

We provide a text relay service for people who are D/deaf, hearing impaired or have a speech impediment.

Our offices have audio induction loops, or if you contact us before your visit we can arrange a British Sign Language (BSL) interpreter.

Find out how to Contact us.

Technical information about this website’s accessibility

[Note: this form of wording is legally required, so do not change it.]

Valuation Tribunal Service is committed to making its website accessible, in accordance with the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018.

[Note: say that the website is fully compliant if the website meets WCAG 2.1 AA standard in full. Say that it’s partially compliant if it meets most requirements of the WCAG 2.1 AA standard. If it does not meet most requirements of the WCAG 2.1 AA standard, say that it’s not compliant. There’s a legally required form of wording here, so do not change it. The 3 options are as follows:]

This website is fully compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.1 AA standard.

This website is partially compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.1 AA standard, due to the non-compliances listed below.

This website is not compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.1 AA standard. The non-accessible sections are listed below.

[Note: delete the options that do not apply.]

Non accessible content

[Note: if the website is fully compliant with the WCAG 2.1 AA standard, you can leave the ‘Non accessible content’ section out.

Otherwise, do not change the ’Non accessible content’ heading or the ‘The content listed below is non-accessible for the following reasons’ sentence - they’re legally required.

Do not change the ‘Non compliance with the accessibility regulations’, ‘Disproportionate burden’ and ‘Content that’s not within the scope of the accessibility regulations’ subheadings: they’re also legally required.

But if you need to list a lot of problems, you can break these subsections up with further subheadings - for example, ‘Navigation and accessing information’ or ‘Interactive tools and transactions’.]

The content listed below is non-accessible for the following reasons.

Non compliance with the accessibility regulations

[Note: In this subsection, list:

  • accessibility problems
  • which of the WCAG 2.1 AA success criteria the problem fails on
  • when you plan to fix the problem

Do not include any problems where you’re claiming disproportionate burden, or where the problem is outside the scope of the accessibility regulations (those should go in the subsections below).]

The website has been tested and passes WCAG 2.0 success criteria but has not been tested against WCAG 2.1 AA.

We plan to update this site with further functionality and plan to do further testing against WCAG 2.1 AA standard before this is release.

We are currently aiming to have this completed for December 2020.

UNTESTED - EXAMPLE TEXT:

Some images do not have a text alternative, so people using a screen reader cannot access the information. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.1.1 (non-text content).

We plan to add text alternatives for all images by September 2020. When we publish new content we’ll make sure our use of images meets accessibility standards.

Disproportionate burden

Many of our older PDF’s and word documents do not meet accessibility standards – for example, they may not be structured so they’re accessible to a screen reader. We think it would be a disproportionate to review all these and reissue them. However, all new PDF and word documents we publish will meet accessibility standards.

[Note: in this subsection list:

  • accessibility problems you’re claiming would be a disproportionate burden to fix
  • which of the WCAG 2.1 AA success criteria the problem fails on

Bear in mind that something which is a disproportionate burden now will not necessarily be a disproportionate burden forever. If the circumstances change, your ability to claim disproportionate burden may change too.]

UNTESTED - EXAMPLE TEXT:

There’s no way to skip the repeated content in the page header (for example, a ‘skip to main content’ option). This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 2.4.1 (bypass blocks).

It’s not always possible to change the device orientation from horizontal to vertical without making it more difficult to view the content. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.4 (orientation).

It’s not possible for users to change text size without some of the content overlapping. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.4.4 (resize text).

Interactive tools and transactions

Some of our interactive forms are difficult to navigate using a keyboard. For example, because some form controls are missing a ‘label’ tag.

Our forms are built and hosted through third party software and ‘skinned’ to look like our website. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.3.1 (information and relationships).

We’ve assessed the cost of fixing the issues with navigation and accessing information, and with interactive tools and transactions. We believe that doing so now would be a disproportionate burden within the meaning of the accessibility regulations. We will make another assessment when the supplier contract is up for renewal, likely to be in [rough timing].

Content that’s not within the scope of the accessibility regulations

The accessibility regulations do not require us to fix PDF’s or other documents published before 23 September 2018 if they’re not essential to providing our service. However, all new PDF and word documents we publish will meet accessibility standards.

[Note: in this subsection list:

  • accessibility problems that fall outside the scope of the accessibility regulations
  • which of the WCAG 2.1 AA success criteria the problem fails on]

UNTESTED - EXAMPLE TEXT:

PDFs and other documents

Many of our older PDFs and Word documents do not meet accessibility standards - for example, they may not be structured so they’re accessible to a screen reader. This does not meet WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 (name, role value).

Some of our PDFs and Word documents are essential to providing our services. For example, we have PDFs with information on how users can access our services, and forms published as Word documents. By September 2020, we plan to either fix these or replace them with accessible HTML pages.

The accessibility regulations do not require us to fix PDFs or other documents published before 23 September 2018 if they’re not essential to providing our services. For example, we do not plan to fix [example of non-essential document].

Any new PDFs or Word documents we publish will meet accessibility standards.

Live video

Live video streams do not have captions. This fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 1.2.4 (captions - live).

We do not plan to add captions to live video streams because live video is exempt from meeting the accessibility regulations.

How we tested this website

This website was last tested on 24th April 2019. The test was carried out by Digital Accessibility Centre, Stephen Lloyd Suite (Unit 18), D’arcy Business Park, Llandarcy Neath, SA10 6FG.

We used this approach to deciding on a sample of pages to test link to explanation of how you decided which pages to test

[Note: you do not have to use this approach to sampling, but you should link to a full explanation of what you tested and how you chose it. If you get a third party auditor to test your website for you, they should include sampling details in test report - so you can just to link to that.]

We tested:

[Note: you can have a single accessibility statement that covers multiple domains, or a separate statement for each domain or subdomain. As long as the user can access relevant accessibility information easily from any page on your website.]

You can read the full accessibility test report.

[Note: publishing the test report is optional, but doing so may allow you to make your accessibility statement shorter and more focused.]

What we’re doing to improve accessibility

[Note: publishing an accessibility roadmap is optional. It’s a good idea to publish one if you want to be specific about the order you’re planning to tackle accessibility issues, and there’s no space to do so in the accessibility statement itself.]

Our accessibility roadmap shows how and when we plan to improve accessibility on this website.

[Note: the wording about when the statement was prepared is legally required, so do not change it.]

This statement was prepared on 24 January 2020. It was last updated on 24 January 2020.