Reported risk evidence comparison

Clothing, textiles and fashion items: nickel — reported risk evidence

The acquired cohort contains 55 official alert references published from 2006-09-01 to 2026-10-02. This page compares 8 selected, distinct product descriptions, including sandals, necklace, shoes. The other 47 records still contribute to the cohort counts but are not displayed: descriptions may repeat, lack the display inputs, or fall outside the eight-description display limit. The recorded risks raise separate evidence questions about nickel. Compare the product features and dated findings below before scoping an investigation. These historical observations do not determine your product’s compliance or a market failure rate.

Evidence retrieved 2026-10-07. Source versions and topic-specific limits are listed below.

Dated official observations

Compare the product features and reported failure mechanism

The source wording below describes the reported case at that time. Read each complete report before using it in an investigation.

Sandals · SR/02645/26

Report published 2026-10-02 · notifying country France · reported origin Portugal

Reported product description: Beige leather sandals intended for women. All batches are concerned. [1]
Reported risk explanation: The rate of nickel release from the buckle on the shoe is too high (measured value up to 22 µg/cm2/week). Nickel is a strong sensitiser and causes allergic reactions if present in articles that come into direct and prolonged contact with the skin. The product does not comply with the REACH Regulation. [1]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): DistributorCategory of measure(s): Recall of the product from end usersDate of entry into force: 10/09/2026Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): DistributorCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: Unknown [1]

Read the official alert ↗

Necklace · SR/00770/26

Report published 2026-03-20 · notifying country Norway · reported origin Unknown

Reported product description: Necklace in a silver colour with pendant that represents a letter from A to Z. Product sold online, in particular via Amazon. [2]
Reported risk explanation: The rate of nickel release is too high (measured value up to 49.7 µg/cm²/week). Nickel is a strong sensitiser and causes allergic reactions if present in articles that come into direct and prolonged contact with the skin. The product does not comply with the REACH Regulation. [2]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): DistributorCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: Unknown [2]

Read the official alert ↗

Shoes · SR/04439/25

Report published 2025-12-26 · notifying country United Kingdom in respect of Northern Ireland · reported origin Unknown

Reported product description: Double buckle sandals in lilac and sage colours. Product sold online, in particular via Asda.co.uk. [3]
Reported risk explanation: The rate of nickel release is too high (measured value up to 12 µg/cm2/week). Nickel is a strong sensitiser and causes allergic reactions if present in articles that come into direct and prolonged contact with the skin. The product does not comply with the REACH Regulation nor with the General Product Safety Regulation. [3]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): RetailerCategory of measure(s): Recall of the product from end usersDate of entry into force: 13/09/2025 [3]

Read the official alert ↗

Leather belt · SR/02226/25

Report published 2025-06-20 · notifying country Finland · reported origin People's Republic of China

Reported product description: Black leather belt with a silver-coloured metallic buckle. The belt has multiple decoration holes in it and it is 100/115 cm long. [4]
Reported risk explanation: The rate of nickel release is too high (measured value up to 5.42 μg/cm²/week). Nickel is a strong sensitiser and can cause allergic reactions if present in articles that come into direct and prolonged contact with the skin. The product does not comply with the REACH Regulation. [4]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: ImporterCategory of measure(s): Import rejected at borderDate of entry into force: 09/05/2025 [4]

Read the official alert ↗

Watch · SR/02275/25

Report published 2025-06-20 · notifying country United Kingdom in respect of Northern Ireland · reported origin Unknown

Reported product description: Watch. Product sold online, in particular via QVC UK. [5]
Reported risk explanation: The rate of nickel release is too high (measured value up to 1.067 µg/cm2/week). Nickel is a strong sensitiser and causes allergic reactions if present in articles that come into direct and prolonged contact with the skin. The product does not comply with the REACH Regulation. [5]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): RetailerCategory of measure(s): Recall of the product from end usersDate of entry into force: 21/01/2025 [5]

Read the official alert ↗

Magnetic buttons · SR/01361/25

Report published 2025-04-11 · notifying country Italy · reported origin People's Republic of China

Reported product description: Set of three magnetic steel buttons, dimensions: 1.4 cm. [6]
Reported risk explanation: The rate of nickel release is too high (measured value up to 5.7 µg/cm²/week). Nickel is a strong sensitiser and causes allergic reactions if present in articles that come into direct and prolonged contact with the skin. The product does not comply with the REACH Regulation. [6]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: ImporterCategory of measure(s): Ban on the marketing of the product and any accompanying measuresDate of entry into force: 12/03/2025 [6]

Read the official alert ↗

Bag · SR/00825/25

Report published 2025-03-07 · notifying country France · reported origin Italy

Reported product description: Dark-blue shoulder bag with silver-coloured metal fittings. [7]
Reported risk explanation: The rate of nickel release is too high (measured value: 19 µg/cm2/week). Nickel is a strong sensitiser and causes allergic reactions if present in articles that come into direct and prolonged contact with the skin. The product does not comply with the REACH Regulation. [7]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): DistributorCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: UnknownType of economic operator taking notified measure(s): DistributorCategory of measure(s): Recall of the product from end usersDate of entry into force: Unknown [7]

Read the official alert ↗

Hat · A12/03250/24

Report published 2024-11-29 · notifying country Finland · reported origin Estonia

Reported product description: Light blue-grey cap with flower print on it (one size), with a metallic clamp in the back for adjustment. [8]
Reported risk explanation: The rate of nickel release is too high (measured values up to 4.14 µg/cm²/week). Nickel is a strong sensitiser and can cause allergic reactions if present in articles that come into direct and prolonged contact with the skin. Product does not comply with the REACH Regulation. [8]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Ban on the marketing of the product and any accompanying measuresDate of entry into force: 30/09/2024Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Recall of the product from end usersDate of entry into force: Unknown [8]

Read the official alert ↗

What this acquired cohort contains

55 distinct official alert references, published between 2006-09-01 and 2026-10-02. Counts describe the acquired reports, with no market denominator.

Report year	Recorded alerts
2006	3
2008	2
2009	1
2010	4
2011	3
2012	2
2013	4
2014	1
2015	1
2016	1
2017	1
2018	2
2019	2
2020	7
2021	2
2022	2
2023	5
2024	5
2025	5
2026	2

Recorded risk labels within this evidence task

Label combinations are source facts within one comparison; they do not create separate guides with identical preparation tasks.

Chemical: 54 recorded references
Health risk / other: 1 recorded references

Source selection, exclusions and calculation method

Filter the acquired, completely parsed English weekly XML releases. Deduplicate official alert references. Group by product category and the complete set of conditional evidence-question topics supported by actual risk text. Risk-label combinations remain recorded cohort facets and do not create buyer intents. Brand, product name, model, origin, notifying country, measurement-only changes and different wording of the same questions do not create intents. Unrecognized mechanisms stay internal for enrichment. Count report years and notifying countries deterministically. Display at most eight newest descriptions with at least 40 characters after whitespace normalization, nonempty reported measures and distinct casefolded descriptions; break date ties by official identifier. All cohort records count even if their description is shorter or not displayed. This is not a representative sample. Counts concern this acquired corpus only.

One acquired version per official public alert reference. Display at most eight newest distinct product descriptions whose normalized whitespace-collapsed text contains at least 40 characters and has nonempty reported measures; ties sort by official identifier. The complete cohort includes shorter descriptions. This is an explicit display selection, not a representative sample.

8 distinct descriptions displayed; 47 cohort records not displayed. Missing fields: {'measures': 8, 'description': 1}.

These are selected, dated enforcement observations in the acquired weekly reports, not a random market sample, market-wide failure rate, proof of current product status, or a determination about your product. Notification country is not a complete sales-market or jurisdiction-coverage field. A quoted legal/standard reference is the report’s statement, not independently verified current law or a mandatory test panel.

Calculation safety-gate-evidence-comparison-10; units recorded alerts; no incidence denominator.

Turn the reported failure mechanism into a scoped investigation

Use this checklist to gather your business or product details before speaking with a specialist. The items below explain what to record and suggest useful supporting documents. You can add your own answers in the editable project brief.

Metal-contact configuration and analytical scope — what evidence do we have?
Record the metal/finish identity and actual skin-contact/use conditions. Check whether the reported concern is composition or release, and whether your analytical method and sample represent the relevant surface. Do not substitute one measurement type for another.
Useful evidence: Material/finish and contact-use details, supplier and analytical method/results, surface/lot traceability and current criterion review.
Reported context: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]
Can we trace the affected component, formula or design revision across our supplied products?
Compare the reported descriptions with your own identifiers and change records. Treat missing or “Unknown” source fields as unresolved; they do not establish that no action was needed.
Useful evidence: Product identifiers, revision history, supplier/batch traceability and market/operator records.
Who would own an evidence review and any resulting corrective-action decision?
Read the reported measures as historical observations. Establish your own operator roles, sector-specific rules, decision owner and communication responsibilities before adopting another case’s response.
Useful evidence: Supply-chain responsibility map, applicable-law review, investigation scope and documented decision/communication workflow.

Work packages and dependencies

Conditional: Product-risk evidence and operator-role review — Compare the recorded product features and failure mechanism with your product. Confirm the applicable product regime, deciding evidence, operator responsibilities and justified next steps. This does not assume that GPSR or a representative appointment applies to every alert category.

Questions for providers

Which specific product features and reported risk mechanism make these cases relevant or irrelevant to our product?
What current legal, standards or scientific sources support your proposed investigation criteria, and what cannot be concluded from these dated alerts?
Which existing evidence can answer the risk question, what additional work is justified, and who owns any resulting corrective-action decision?

Sources and data dates

Read the official document in context. The audit details identify the precise locators and preserved versions used for this page.