Furniture: detachable parts — reported risk evidence
The acquired cohort contains 4 official alert references published from 2023-01-13 to 2025-04-04. This page compares 3 selected, distinct product descriptions, including children's table, learning tower, armchair for children. 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 detachable parts. 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.
Children's table · SR/01171/25
Report published 2025-04-04 · notifying country France · reported origin Hong Kong
Reported product description
Small wooden table with dimensions of 60x60x46 cm, fitted with rubber feet. Product sold online, in particular via moulinroty-maboutique.com. [1]
Reported risk explanation
The rubber feet of the table could be detached and ingested by a child using the table, leading to choking. The product does not comply with the General Product Safety Regulation. [1]
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: UnknownType of economic operator taking notified measure(s): ImporterCategory of measure(s): Recall of the product from end usersDate of entry into force: 10/03/2025 [1]
Report published 2024-02-16 · notifying country Germany · reported origin Germany
Reported product description
Metal learning tower with MDF platform. Weight: approximately 7.42 kg, height: 443 mm, width: 350 mm, width of feet: 386 mm, depth: 350 mm, height of platform top step: 470 mm. Product sold online, in particular via Amazon ASIN: B07612DGLJ. [2]
Reported risk explanation
The product has small parts (the cover caps of the drill holes) which can easily detach. A small child may put them in the mouth and choke. Moreover, the product is not stable and it can fall down causing injuries to the child or bystanders. The product does not comply with the requirements of the General Product Safety Directive nor with European standards EN 13387-5 and EN 14988. [2]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Recall of the product from end usersDate of entry into force: 11/01/2024Type 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: 11/01/2024Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: 11/01/2024 [2]
Report published 2024-01-05 · notifying country France · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Unicorn-shaped armchair made of padded false-fur type polyester fabric. The product is sold online. [3]
Reported risk explanation
The armchair contains holes and the padding is thus accessible. The fibrous stuffing material of the armchair is easily accessible due to holes. A small child may put the filling material in the mouth and choke. This product does not comply with the requirements of the General Product Safety Directive [3]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Recall of the product from end usersDate of entry into force: 20/11/2023Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Destruction of the productDate of entry into force: UnknownType of economic operator taking notified measure(s): ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: 16/11/2023 [3]
4 distinct official alert references, published between 2023-01-13 and 2025-04-04. Counts describe the acquired reports, with no market denominator.
Report year
Recorded alerts
2023
1
2024
2
2025
1
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.
Choking: 3 recorded references
Choking, Injuries: 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.
3 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.
Accessible and detachable parts — what evidence do we have?
Document the intended users/age, accessible parts, attachment/retention design and relevant use or misuse conditions. Compare the source’s actual detachment or choking explanation with your product; agree justified methods and current criteria separately.
Useful evidence: Age/use rationale, part/attachment drawings, material and assembly data, existing retention/accessibility evidence.
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.
