The acquired cohort contains 8 official alert references published from 2007-12-21 to 2026-06-19. This page compares 7 selected, distinct product descriptions, including foldable electric bicycle, motocross motorcycle, caster board. 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 accessible edges. 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.
Foldable electric bicycle · SR/01781/26
Report published 2026-06-19 · notifying country United Kingdom in respect of Northern Ireland · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Foldable electric bicycle with included battery charger and wall plug. [1]
Reported risk explanation
The product has a sharp edge in the folding mechanism, which could wear away the insulation of the product wiring over time and cause the bike to fail during use, potentially leading to injuries to the user. The product does not comply with the requirements of the Machinery Directive. [1]
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: Unknown [1]
Report published 2020-01-10 · notifying country Finland · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Small motocross motorcycle (dirt bike) intended for children or persons under 90 kg weight. [2]
Reported risk explanation
The product has sharp edges and angles. Consequently the user could become injured while riding the bike.Accessible parts become hot during use. If touched, the user could burn. The fuel shut-off control is located at the carburettor intake and the vent hose of the fuel tank has no support. Consequently, fuel could leak onto hot surfaces and lead to a fire.The speed limiting device does not work. As a result, the vehicle could reach high speeds and make the user lose control, increasing the risk of accident. The product does not comply with the requirements of the Machinery Directive and the relevant European standard EN 16029. [2]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: DistributorCategory of measure(s): Ban on the marketing of the product and any accompanying measuresDate of entry into force: 04/12/2019 [2]
Report published 2018-05-11 · notifying country Bulgaria · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Skateboard (caster board), divided into two platforms, interconnected with torsion suspension, with 2 silicone wheels. [3]
Reported risk explanation
The outer line of the board is not sufficiently rounded. As a consequence there are sharp edges which can lead to injury.The product does not comply with the relevant European Standard EN 13613. [3]
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: 13/04/2018 [3]
Report published 2010-10-29 · notifying country Hungary · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
White-yellow-red coloured foldable scooter with aluminium frame, packaged in cardboard box. Weight limit indicated on box is 70 kg. [4]
Reported risk explanation
The product poses a risk of injuries and cuts because:- fingers can become trapped between folding parts;- the user’s hands can slip off the handlebars because the retaining plugs for the handlebar grips can come out easily;- the steering column does not have sufficient strength and can deform;- the accessible parts of the rear wheel-fork are sharp and have protruding sharp points.The product does not comply with the relevant European standard EN 14619. [4]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: OtherCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal from the market ordered by the authorities.Date of entry into force: Unknown [4]
Report published 2009-01-16 · notifying country Slovakia · reported origin Unknown
Reported product description
City bicycle with 26” wheels and 1 speed, back pedal brake on the rear wheel, equipped with a basket at the front, back carrier and lighting with dynamo. Marking on the frame - KENZEL INTENSIVE City Classic 265. [5]
Reported risk explanation
The product poses a risk of injuries because: - unprotected sharp edges were detected on the bicycle, which may cause injuries to the rider during normal use, - the design of the brake lever does not ensure a safe grip and the bicycle therefore fails to stop safely, - the fork twists, which may cause the user to lose control of the bicycle, - the stem may become entirely detached resulting in loss of control of the bicycle. The product does not comply with the relevant European standard EN 14764. [5]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): OtherCategory of measure(s): Voluntary withdrawal from the market and recall from consumers by the manufacturer.Date of entry into force: Unknown [5]
Report published 2008-01-11 · notifying country Spain · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Multi-gym. The packaging is a cardboard box carrying the product name, reference and "40 Kg 2h. Max 110 Kg. Two-year warranty. [6]
Reported risk explanation
The product poses a risk of injuries because:- it has sharp edges in accessible areas and the edges are not rounded; - it also presents the risk of fingers or hands becoming trapped in the upper and lower areas.Due to these shortcomings users of this machine may suffer injuries, cuts or trap their fingers and hands.The product does not comply with the Machinery Directive 98/37/EC and the relevant European standard EN 957. [6]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: OtherCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal from the market ordered by the authorities.Date of entry into force: Unknown [6]
Report published 2007-12-21 · notifying country Spain · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Folding metal scooter with two 4" wheels. The packaging is a cardboard box. [7]
Reported risk explanation
The product poses a serious risk of injuries because cutting edges exist on various metal parts of the scooter.The product does not comply with the relevant European standards EN 71 and EN 14619. [7]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): OtherCategory of measure(s): Voluntary withdrawal from the market and recall from consumers by the importer. Date of entry into force: Unknown [7]
8 distinct official alert references, published between 2007-12-21 and 2026-06-19. Counts describe the acquired reports, with no market denominator.
Report year
Recorded alerts
2007
1
2008
1
2009
1
2010
2
2018
1
2020
1
2026
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.
Burns, Fire, Injuries: 1 recorded references
Cuts, Injuries: 1 recorded references
Injuries: 6 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; 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 edges and points — what evidence do we have?
Compare the particular accessible edge or point, material, geometry and use conditions with the reported cutting mechanism. Ask a specialist to justify the applicable assessment and criteria for your actual product and users.
Useful evidence: Dimensioned edge/point drawings, material and finish specifications, use/accessibility context and relevant existing evaluation.
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.
