The acquired cohort contains 5 official alert references published from 2024-11-01 to 2025-12-05. This page compares 4 selected, distinct product descriptions, including key ring, christmas decoration. The other 1 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 lead, plasticizers. 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.
Key ring · SR/04213/25
Report published 2025-12-05 · notifying country Sweden · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Black backpack attached to a key ring, intended as a charm for mobile phones and bags. [1]
Reported risk explanation
The plastic material of the product has an excessive concentration of bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) dibutyl phthalate (DBP) and lead (measured values up to 2.7%, 0.16% and 0.08% by weight, respectively). These phthalates may harm the health by causing possible damage to the reproductive system. DEHP may harm the health by causing possible damage to the reproductive system. Lead is harmful to human health, accumulates in the body, can cause developmental neurotoxicity and may affect breast-fed or unborn children. The product does not comply with the General Product Safety Regulation nor with the REACH Regulation. [1]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Import rejected at borderDate of entry into force: 14/11/2025 [1]
Report published 2025-12-05 · notifying country Sweden · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Plastic dog, plastic chocolate bar and strings attached to a key ring, intended as a charm for mobile phones and bags. [2]
Reported risk explanation
The plastic material of the dog has an excessive concentration of bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) and dibutyl phthalate (DBP) (measured values up to 4.5% and 0.12% by weight, respectively). In addition, the plastic material of the chocolate bar has an excessive concentration of bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) and lead (measured values up to 22% and 0.12% by weight, respectively). These phthalates may harm the health by causing possible damage to the reproductive system. Lead is harmful to human health, accumulates in the body, can cause developmental neurotoxicity and may affect breast-fed or unborn children. The product does not comply with the General Product Safety Regulation nor with the REACH Regulation. [2]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Import rejected at borderDate of entry into force: 14/11/2025 [2]
Report published 2025-11-28 · notifying country Sweden · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Plastic croissant attached to a key ring, intended as a charm for mobile phones and bags. [3]
Reported risk explanation
The plastic material of the product has an excessive concentration of bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) and lead (measured values up to 3.11% and 0.08% by weight, respectively). DEHP may harm the health by causing possible damage to the reproductive system. Lead is harmful to human health, accumulates in the body, can cause developmental neurotoxicity and may affect breast-fed or unborn children. The product does not comply with the General Product Safety Regulation nor with the REACH Regulation. [3]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Import rejected at borderDate of entry into force: 14/11/2025 [3]
Report published 2024-11-01 · notifying country Sweden · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Dancing christmas decoration in the shape of Santa Claus [4]
Reported risk explanation
The solders in the product have an excessive concentration of lead. (measured value 81.5% % by weight). The plastic material of the product has an excessive concentration of bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) and diisobutyl phthalate (DIBP) (measured values: up to 6.9 % and up to 0.77 % by weight, respectively). The product has an excessive concentration of short chain chlorinated paraffins (SCCPs) (measured value: up to 1.36 % by weight).Lead poses a risk to the environment. DEHP and DIBP poses a risk to human health and the environment.SCCPs persist in the environment, are toxic to aquatic organisms at low concentrations and bio-accumulate in wildlife and humans, posing a risk to human health and the environment. The product does not comply with the requirements of the Directive on the restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment (RoHS 2 Directive) nor with the Persistent Organic Pollutants (POP) Regulation. [4]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): ImporterCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: 30/08/2024 [4]
5 distinct official alert references, published between 2024-11-01 and 2025-12-05. Counts describe the acquired reports, with no market denominator.
Report year
Recorded alerts
2024
2
2025
3
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: 3 recorded references
Environment: 2 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.
4 distinct descriptions displayed; 1 cohort records not displayed. Missing fields: {}.
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.
Lead-bearing material and exposure context — what evidence do we have?
Identify the particular material/component, its accessible/use context and supplier evidence. Reconcile any analytical result with the sampled part, method and lot. A reported concentration in another product does not establish your result or a universal limit.
Useful evidence: Part/material BOM, supplier specifications, sampling/method/results, lot/revision records and current use-specific legal review.
Plasticizer identity, material and use — what evidence do we have?
Identify the actual plasticizer/substance and polymer/component, with composition and use/exposure facts. Similar abbreviations or a general “phthalates” label do not resolve exact identity or applicable conditions. Keep concentrations and legal scope questions separate.
Useful evidence: Supplier substance/CAS/EC identities, composition and material records, sampled-component results and exact use/actor context.
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.
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.
