3% of Agency Executives Are Aware of What Comes Next

3% Awareness, 97% Exposure

3% of agency executives understand how fast accessibility legislation is changing. Most still believe that accessibility responsibility sits with the client, or that carefully worded terms and conditions protect them from risk. Both assumptions are now wrong.

Across new and updated regulations, a single idea appears again and again: vendor accountability. Lawmakers have recognised that digital suppliers, not clients, are often the ones making or overstating compliance claims. To address this, the latest laws now include clauses that remove the ability for vendors to hide behind their own terms and conditions. The intent is clear: responsibility cannot be contracted away.

Agencies, CMS providers, and digital suppliers are becoming ever more accountable, and with new laws legally accountable when clients’ websites or online products fail accessibility requirements. Accessibility has shifted from a design preference to a regulated standard, and that change is already written into law across several key US states. The same model is spreading internationally, from the EEA to Asia-Pacific.

Where the Law Now Sits

Accessibility requirements have been part of US procurement policy for decades, but the latest state-level updates explicitly extend responsibility to service providers.

Why Agencies Are Now in the Firing Line

These laws were created because agencies and technology partners have repeatedly over-promised compliance. Clients relied on those claims and were left exposed. The law now treats the supplier as a party to accessibility failure unless that supplier explicitly states that compliance is not included. Even then, such disclaimers offer little protection as contract language rarely overrides civil-rights legislation.

Retrospective Risk

While current rules apply to new contracts, legislators are debating how far back accountability can reach. Some discussions propose retrospective enforcement covering prior projects by one, three, or even five years. Class actions are already being discussed where clients share common vendor claims.

The Global Echo

The same legislative structure is emerging globally. The European Accessibility Act sets shared liability, the UK is expected to follow, and similar policies are already embedded in Asia-Pacific procurement frameworks. Privacy enforcement is following a similar path, extending accountability to vendors who manage user data.

The Legal Detail Agencies Overlook

Terms and conditions that once felt watertight now offer little protection. Accessibility law prioritises user rights. If an agency's work prevents equal access, courts side with the user, not the supplier's contract. The safest route is transparency: make clear whether compliance is provided and prove it where claimed.

Risk, Exposure, and Evidence

Accessibility is the first area where supplier liability is tested, but privacy and data control will follow. Risk now sits in proposals, RFPs, and statements of compliance. Agencies must maintain audit trails and evidence to defend their position.

What Agencies Should Do Now

1. Audit your exposure and review all contracts mentioning compliance.
2. Validate every claim of accessibility.
3. Maintain documentation and testing records.
4. Align proposal language with deliverable proof.
5. Establish continuous oversight and evidence reporting.

How AOD Supports Awareness and Oversight

The Agency Opportunity Dashboard (AOD) provides clear visibility of accessibility exposure across client estates. It identifies where compliance has been promised but not verified, and tracks progress over time. AOD acts as both auditing evidence and ongoing oversight, giving agencies the certainty they need.

The Reality

Liability is written into law. Ignorance is not a defence. Only 3 % of agencies understand this change, leaving 97 % at risk. Agencies that act now can prepare. Those that wait may face difficult questions about why they did not.

References and Sources