This comparison covers 3 official alert references, including portable lamp, desk lamp, rechargeable head torch, published from 2016-05-13 to 2022-09-30. The recorded risks raise separate evidence questions about insulation, plug interfaces, 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.
Portable lamp · A11/00108/22
Report published 2022-09-30 · notifying country Poland · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Portable lamp with a clip-shaped base and a 1.1 m long plug cord. The lamp diffuser is in metal, available in different colours. 230 V, for E27 lightbulbs. [1]
Reported risk explanation
The protection against accidental loosening of lamp's casing is inadequate, the cross-sectional area of the wires is too thin, the wires pass through sharp metal parts and could become damaged due to insufficient protection of the insulating material, the wire is not secured against pulling, and the plug has inadequate dimensions. Live parts may become accessible, hence a user may receive an electric shock. The product does not comply with the requirements of the Low Voltage Directive nor with the European standard EN 60598-1. [1]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Warning consumers of the risksDate of entry into force: 08/08/2022Type 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: 08/08/2022 [1]
Report published 2017-07-21 · notifying country Hungary · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Foldable, rechargeable portable table lamp with 14 LEDs. The battery can be charged via telescopic pins of the built-in plug. Packaging: blister pack with cardboard backing. [2]
Reported risk explanation
null The pins of the built-in plug do not have an insulating collar. The user may touch the live pins when plugging the plug into a mains socket. The basic insulated moving wires touch the sharp edges of metal wrist screws: in case of damage to the insulation, the live metal conductors would become accessible. The heat and flame resistance of the insulating material that hold the pins of the built-in plug in position is insufficient. The product does not comply with the requirements of the Low Voltage Directive and the relevant European standard EN 60598. [2]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: DistributorCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: UnknownType of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: DistributorCategory of measure(s): Recall of the product from end usersDate of entry into force: 16/06/2017 [2]
Report published 2016-05-13 · notifying country Hungary · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Rechargeable head torch with battery charger. Packaging: cardboard box. [3]
Reported risk explanation
null The basic insulated internal wires of the head torch can be damaged by the sharp edges of the cover fixing screws during adjustment of the head torch. The dimensions of the battery charger are not correct and when connecting the plug the user may consequently touch the live parts of the plug or the live connector terminal sockets. The cross-sectional area of the core of the wires is insufficient: in case of a short circuit the wires may overheat. The heat and flame resistance of the insulating material that holds the pins of the built-in plug in position is not sufficient and the product may thus cause a fire.The product does not comply with the requirements of the Low Voltage Directive and the relevant European standard EN 60598. [3]
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: UnknownType of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: OtherCategory of measure(s): Recall of the product from end usersDate of entry into force: 28/01/2016 [3]
3 distinct official alert references, published between 2016-05-13 and 2022-09-30. Counts describe the acquired reports, with no market denominator.
Report year
Recorded alerts
2016
1
2017
1
2022
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.
Electric shock: 1 recorded references
Electric shock, Fire: 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.
3 distinct descriptions displayed; 0 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.
Power-supply insulation boundaries — what evidence do we have?
If your product uses a mains supply or adapter, identify the actual power-supply architecture, insulation boundaries and accessible parts. Ask a qualified specialist which design evidence and investigation would address the reported shock mechanism for this configuration. No medical-device standard or pass/fail limit is selected from this alert.
Useful evidence: Schematics, adapter/component specifications, ratings, insulation/protection design and configuration-specific existing test evidence.
Plug, socket and connector interfaces — what evidence do we have?
Identify the exact plug/socket or connector configuration, intended country interface and any adapter supplied. Document the interface dimensions, accessible parts and assembly controls for specialist review against current applicable requirements. Do not assume a reported interface failure applies to every configuration.
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.
