The acquired cohort contains 6 official alert references published from 2009-04-17 to 2026-02-27. This page compares 5 selected, distinct product descriptions, including fancy-dress costume, princess costume - cinderella super deluxe, play-hammock - airplayne hammock-playne. 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 ignition/materials, entrapment/cords. 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.
Fancy-dress costume · SR/00605/26
Report published 2026-02-27 · notifying country France · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Witch costume comprising a cloak and a hat. Product sold online, in particular via Shein (unique product identifier: sl25073133330030408) and Amazon. [1]
Reported risk explanation
The product has long functional cords close to the neck. The cords may become trapped during various activities of a child, leading to injuries and/or strangulation. Moreover, the product is highly flammable. Children could wear the costume close to an ignition source and the costume could catch fire, resulting in burns. The product does not comply with the requirements of the Toy Safety Directive nor with European standards EN 71-1 and EN 71-2. [1]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): OtherCategory of measure(s): Removal of this product listing by the online marketplaceDate of entry into force: UnknownType of economic operator taking notified measure(s): OtherCategory of measure(s): Recall of the product from end usersDate of entry into force: 29/01/2026Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): OtherCategory of measure(s): Removal of this product listing by the online marketplaceDate of entry into force: 06/03/2026Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): OtherCategory of measure(s): Warning consumers of the risksDate of entry into force: 06/03/2026 [1]
Report published 2017-08-18 · notifying country Finland · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Children's black cape with a hood and cords in the neck area. [2]
Reported risk explanation
null The cords in the neck/throat area can become trapped during various activities of a child, leading to strangulation. Moreover, the material of the cape is highly flammable. If the cape catches fire when worn, the child could suffer burns.The product does not comply with the requirements of the Toy Safety Directive and the relevant European standards EN 71-2 and EN 14682. [2]
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: 11/07/2017Type 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: 08/05/2017 [2]
Princess costume - Cinderella Super Deluxe · 0211/10
Report published 2010-02-12 · notifying country Finland · reported origin Unknown
Reported product description
Importer's / Manufacturer's code 19931.Cinderella costume, 140 cm. [3]
Reported risk explanation
The product poses a risk of strangulation and of injuries due to the presence of functional cords at the back.The product does not comply with the relevant European standard EN 14862.In addition, the product does not comply with the provision of the relevant European standard EN 71 concerning warnings on flammability. [3]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): OtherCategory of measure(s): Voluntary recall from consumers.Date of entry into force: Unknown [3]
Report published 2009-05-01 · notifying country United Kingdom · reported origin Germany
Reported product description
A blue, red and yellow play-hammock that is cylindrical in shape and has an aeroplane design on both sides. Provided with two black cords for suspending the toy and instructions for use. Packaging is a large cardboard box with a picture of the hammock with children inside and information in several European languages. [4]
Reported risk explanation
The product poses a risk of strangulation as the cords exceed the permitted length and could strangle a child. In addition, the toy does not pass the flammability test. The product does not comply with the Toys Directive and the relevant European standard EN 71. [4]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): OtherCategory of measure(s): Voluntary withdrawal from the market by the distributor.Date of entry into force: Unknown [4]
Report published 2009-04-17 · notifying country Greece · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Yellow, green, blue and lilac coloured yo-yo balls with 2 white eyes and a black line for a mouth. When pressed, a flash-light is produced from inside. The balls are packed in a blue cardboard box in 12 pieces, but can also be sold separately. [5]
Reported risk explanation
The product poses a risk of: - fire, because during tests carried out the material presented behaviour of rapid ignition, - strangulation, because the length of the elastic rope reaches 900mm, while the maximum permitted limit is 220mm. The product does not comply with the Toys Directive and the relevant European standard EN 71. [5]
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 [5]
6 distinct official alert references, published between 2009-04-17 and 2026-02-27. Counts describe the acquired reports, with no market denominator.
Report year
Recorded alerts
2009
2
2010
1
2017
2
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, Injuries, Strangulation: 1 recorded references
Burns, Strangulation: 2 recorded references
Fire, Strangulation: 1 recorded references
Injuries, Strangulation: 1 recorded references
Strangulation: 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.
5 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.
Cord, opening and entrapment configuration — what evidence do we have?
Record the relevant cord/strap, loop, opening or restraint geometry and the intended user/use context. Ask which specific configuration could create the reported trapping/strangulation mechanism; do not infer a universal dimension or release-force limit.
Material, ignition and use context — what evidence do we have?
Identify the relevant material/component and exposure to the reported ignition mechanism. Document product configuration and intended use before agreeing justified methods and criteria. The recorded fire concern does not select a complete mandatory test panel.
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.
