Skip to main content

Powered by Transport for Greater Manchester

Card search

Accessibility statement

Accessibility statement for Transport for Greater Manchester

This accessibility statement applies to contactless.beenetwork.com the Transport for Greater Manchester contactless self-service portal.

This website is run by Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM). We want as many people as possible to be able to use these websites. For example, that means you should be able to:

  • change colours, contrast levels and fonts

  • zoom in up to 400% 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

  • understand most of the website using a screen reader

  • read most of the website on devices without a screen, like a braille computer

We also try to make 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

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

  • Most PDF documents are not accessible to screen reader software.

  • Journey information may be difficult for some people to understand, especially those using a screen reader, due to missing headings or code structure.

  • Some of our online forms are difficult to understand or navigate when using a keyboard or screen reader.

  • Some status messages or content changes are not correctly announced to people using a screen reader.

  • Some images may not have sufficient alternative text descriptions

  • Some decorative images are unnecessarily announced and focusable by screen readers.

  • Visible scroll and keyboard focus position can sometimes move to confusing locations when navigating between pages.

  • Pages don’t always have a title in browser that’s specific to their content.

  • Some hyperlinks may not clearly describe the purpose of the onward link, or phrases such as ‘click here’ may be used.

  • Some interactive elements may not have a clear focus indicator, or the indicator may not have sufficient contrast against its background.

  • Some features may become obscured or difficult to use when using the browser in a magnified state.

Feedback and contact information

If you need information on this website in a different and more accessible format, please contact us for support.

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

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, please contact us.

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).

Contacting us by phone

We provide a telephone translation service to enable customers to receive information in their preferred language. Find out how to contact us.

Technical information about this website’s accessibility

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

Compliance status

This website is partially compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.2 AA standard, due to the non-compliances listed below.

Non-accessible content

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

Non-compliance with accessibility regulations

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

  • The keyboard focus indicator is missing from a few interactive elements. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 2.4.7 Focus Visible (level AA).

  • When zooming in 400% on a desktop, some text is cut off in a few instances. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.4.10 Reflow (level AA).

  • The minimum ratio for colour contrast is not met in a few instances where interactive elements are in focus. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.1.1 Non-Text Content (level AA).

  • Some images do not have alternative text which conveys their meaning, or do not have a 'null' value where they are purely decorative, and screen readers should ignore the image. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.1.1 Non-text content (level AA).

  • Some images are images of text which is not accessible to screen readers and cannot be changed to meet user preferences. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.4.5 Images of Text (level AA).

  • Some complex images, including maps, do not have a text description on the content of the image. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.1.1 Non-text content (level AA). We plan to address this across the site by March 2025.

  • Error messages are not automatically announced by screen readers in a few instances. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.3.1 Info and Relationships (level A).

  • Questions with multiple answers are not grouped together in a few instances. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.3.1 Info and Relationships (level A).

  • Text font icons have been used in some places which may lose their meaning to screen readers if the website font is overridden. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.3.1 Info and Relationships (level A).

  • Some hyperlinks do not clearly describe where they will take the user to. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 2.4.4 Link Purpose (level A).

  • The correct label of interactive elements is not announced by screen readers in a few instances. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value (level A).

  • Date inputs in the journey history search do not work with a keyboard or screen reader and have unexpected ARIA. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 2.1.1 Keyboard (A) and 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value (level A).

  • Some form fields and errors are not labelled or grouped correctly in code, and forms are missing, meaning these controls will be difficult for people using a screen reader to understand or use. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.3.1 Information and Relationships (level A).

  • Journey information is not well structured with headings and other semantically meaningful elements, making it difficult for screen readers to interpret. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.3.1 Information and Relationships (level A).

  • Journey query form fields are not programmatically associated to a specific journey, meaning people using a screen reader may not be able to confidently use them. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.3.1 Information and Relationships (level A).

  • Some journey filter controls can become visually out of sync when dates are customised, causing confusion to those with cognitive or learning impairments. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.3.1 Information and Relationships (level A).

  • Some journey filter controls can become visually out of sync when dates are customised, causing confusion to those with cognitive or learning impairments. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.3.1 Information and Relationships (level A).

  • Required fields in the contact form are not identified as being required. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (level A).

  • Some form fields lack a visible label or rely on placeholder text as the label. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (level A).

  • Scroll and focus position can become lost when moving through journey query steps with a keyboard or screen reader. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 3.2.2 On Input (level A).

  • Personal data inputs in the journey query’s contact form are missing autocomplete functionality, making them harder to complete for people with cognitive or mobility impairments. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.3.5 Identify Input Purpose (level AA).

  • Decorative inline SVG images are announced as generic images and often focusable to screen readers. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.1.1 Non-text Content (level AA).

  • Some heading text is not using heading elements in code which removes them from the document outline for screen readers. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.3.1 Information and Relationships (level A).

  • Some information that’s grouped visually is not grouped in code, meaning screen reader users do not get an equitable experience. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.3.1 Information and Relationships (level A).

  • Keyboard focus indicators sometimes lack sufficient contrast against backgrounds. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.4.11 Non-text Contrast (level AA).

  • Some pages lack a meaningful page title, making it harder for people using a screen reader to navigate the site. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 2.4.2 Page Titled (level A).

  • Logos are wrapped in links that don’t communicate their destination. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context) (level A).

  • One iFrame is missing an accessible name, making it hard for screen readers to identify its purpose. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value (level A).

  • Loaders and new content isn’t announced to screen readers or scrolled into view. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 4.1.3 Status Messages (level AA).

  • A button has been incorrectly nested inside a link, leading to extra tab stops and confusing screen reader announcements. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.3.1 Information and Relationships (level A).

  • This area of the site does not have a link allowing keyboard and screen reader users to skip the header content as on the rest of the site. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks (level A).

We plan to fix these issues by March 2025.

Email to customers

  • Journey history may be difficult for people using a screen reader to understand because the HTML code is missing meaningful structure like headings. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.3.1 Information and Relationships (A).

  • Image alternative descriptions do not accurately describe the content that’s presented visually. This fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.1.1 Non-text Content (AA).

We plan to fix these issues by March 2025.

PDFs and non-HTML documents

  • Many of our PDFs are not accessible in a number of ways including missing text alternatives and missing document structure. We plan to address this across the site by March 2025.

Third party components

  • The card number form field to log in to the contactless self-service area of the site is provided by a third-party supplier via an iFrame. This field is programmatically unlabelled and therefore fails WCAG 2.2 success criterion 1.3.1 Information and Relationships (level A). We have raised this issue with the external party to request a fix.

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

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

  • Maps - but essential information must be published in an accessible format.

  • Third-party content that’s under someone else’s control if TfGM did not pay for it or develop it itself.

Preparation of this accessibility statement

This statement was prepared on 16 October 2024 and last reviewed on 16 October 2024.

An audit of the Transport for Greater Manchester contactless self-service portal was completed in October 2024. The tests were carried out by Nomensa who audited a representative sample of components and pages.