Electrical appliances and equipment: stability/load — reported risk evidence
The acquired cohort contains 9 official alert references published from 2005-07-22 to 2016-08-12. This page compares 7 selected, distinct product descriptions, including electric heater, electric fan, electric fan. The other 2 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 stability/load. 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.
Electric heater · A12/0989/16
Report published 2016-08-12 · notifying country Cyprus · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Electric heater in a white/red cardboard package. [1]
Reported risk explanation
null The heater is not stable and could overturn leading to a fire.The product does not comply with the requirements of the Low Voltage Directive and the relevant European Standard EN 60335. [1]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: OtherCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: 21/06/2016 [1]
Report published 2016-04-08 · notifying country Cyprus · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Electric fan, floor standing, supplied in a cardboard box. [2]
Reported risk explanation
null The electrical insulation is not adequate and the user could receive an electric shock. The fan is unstable and could tip over during use and hit a person. The product does not comply with the requirements of the Low Voltage Directive and the relevant European standard EN 60335. [2]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: OtherCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: 30/11/2015 [2]
Report published 2010-11-05 · notifying country Cyprus · reported origin Taiwan
Reported product description
The product is an electric fan with a stand. It has five switches. Three on/speed switches, one off switch and one switch for the control of the oscillation of the fan. 240V, 50Hz, 100W, CLASS I [3]
Reported risk explanation
The product poses a risk of injuries and fire because:a) it can easily overturn;b) it does not have sufficient resistance to resistance to heat and fire.The product does not comply with the Low Voltage Directive and the relevant European standard EN 60335. [3]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: OtherCategory of measure(s): Sales ban ordered by the authorities.Date of entry into force: Unknown [3]
Report published 2010-06-05 · notifying country Cyprus · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
The product is a pedestal black oscillating fan, size 18" for domestic use. It has two switches. One switch for on/off operation (3 speeds) and one switch for the oscillation mode. 240V-50Hz, 130W, CLASS I [4]
Reported risk explanation
The product poses a risk of injuries because it can easily overturn.The product does not comply with the Low Voltage Directive (LVD) and the relevant European standard EN 60335. [4]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: OtherCategory of measure(s): Sales ban ordered by the authorities.Date of entry into force: Unknown [4]
Report published 2007-10-12 · notifying country Germany · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
6-socket power strip, white, with switch. Packed in plastic foil. [5]
Reported risk explanation
The product poses a risk of electric shock because:- the protective conductor is shorter than required,- connecting wires are soldered,- distance between the protective conductor contacts exceeds the value permitted in the standard,- protective conductor contacts are insufficiently stable,- connection cable is non-compliant and mechanically unstable,- wire cross-sections are too smallThis product does not comply with the Low Voltage Directive and the relevant standard. [5]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): OtherCategory of measure(s): Voluntary withdrawal from the market by the importer.Date of entry into force: Unknown [5]
Report published 2005-09-16 · notifying country Portugal · reported origin Spain
Reported product description
Mobile electric oil radiator “Taurus” with thermostat (Type/model: NY12EC-5L / DAKAR 1200) [6]
Reported risk explanation
Risk of injury. Exceeds the permitted temperatures; insufficient stability; unsafe cable fixation; unsafe electric insulation. The radiator does not comply with the Low Voltage Directive and the relevant European standards. [6]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: OtherCategory of measure(s): Placing on the market prohibited by the authorities.Date of entry into force: Unknown [6]
Report published 2005-07-22 · notifying country Hungary · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Multi functional electric kitchen food processor "Domotec" (MS – 7751). [7]
Reported risk explanation
Risk of injury. When using the fruit extractor it is possible to place in the wrong way the lid in such a way that the protective devices do not operate leaving access to the rotating clutch or the to the chopper; insufficient stability. One accident reported with injury to the user’s fingers. The food processor does not comply with the Low Voltage Directive and the relevant European standards. [7]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: OtherCategory of measure(s): Placing on the market prohibited and withdrawal from distribution ordered by the authorities.Date of entry into force: Unknown [7]
9 distinct official alert references, published between 2005-07-22 and 2016-08-12. Counts describe the acquired reports, with no market denominator.
Report year
Recorded alerts
2005
2
2007
1
2010
2
2011
1
2012
1
2016
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.
Burns, Fire: 1 recorded references
Cuts: 1 recorded references
Electric shock, Fire: 1 recorded references
Electric shock, Injuries: 1 recorded references
Fire: 1 recorded references
Fire, Injuries: 1 recorded references
Injuries: 3 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.
7 distinct descriptions displayed; 2 cohort records not displayed. Missing fields: {'measures': 2}.
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.
Stability and load-bearing use — what evidence do we have?
Identify the intended loads, support/attachment design, adjustment positions and use surface. Compare the reported collapse or instability mechanism with the actual configuration and agree a supported investigation rather than copying another case’s response.
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.
