The acquired cohort contains 9 official alert references published from 2014-02-21 to 2026-03-13. This page compares 8 selected, distinct product descriptions, including doll house toy, plastic doll, plastic dolls. 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 battery access/ingestion, plasticizers. 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.
Doll house toy · SR/00691/26
Report published 2026-03-13 · notifying country United Kingdom in respect of Northern Ireland · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Doll house toy set made from plastic blocks, including furniture, battery operated lights and four dolls. Product sold online, in particular via Amazon. [1]
Reported risk explanation
The toy contains an excessive concentration of bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), dibutyl phthalate (DBP), diisobutyl phthalate (DIBP) and di-isononyl phthalate (DINP). The phthalates may harm the health of children, causing possible damage to their reproductive system. Moreover, the battery compartment can easily be opened without use of any tools and the batteries inside are easily accessible. If a child puts them in the mouth, the battery can overheat and release electrolyte which can be ingested by the child and cause damage to the gastrointestinal tract. The product does not comply with the requirements of the Toy Safety 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: 13/01/2026 [1]
Report published 2014-08-01 · notifying country Czechia · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Plastic doll, 30cm, with wings, and a pink brush accessory. Supplied with three button batteries. [2]
Reported risk explanation
null The product poses a chemical risk because the head of the doll contains di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) above the permitted levels (measured value: 14.3%). Moreover, the product is sold with accessible button batteries, which could be ingested by children. The ingestion of the batteries can enact a short-circuit in the digestive system when they come into contact with liquids.According to the REACH Regulation, phthalates DEHP, DBP and BBP are prohibited in all toys and childcare articles, while phthalates DINP, DIDP and DNOP are prohibited when the toy or the childcare article can be placed in the mouth by children.The product does not comply with the requirements of the Toy Safety Directive. [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: 26/06/2014 [2]
Report published 2014-08-01 · notifying country Spain · reported origin Hong Kong
Reported product description
Doll which emits sounds (it contains button batteries) in a transparent plastic bag. [3]
Reported risk explanation
null The product poses a chemical risk because the head of the doll contains above 25% by weight of bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP). According to the REACH Regulation, phthalates DEHP, DBP and BBP are prohibited in all toys and childcare articles, while phthalates DINP, DIDP and DNOP are prohibited when the toy or the childcare article can be placed in the mouth by children.The battery compartment can easily be opened leaving the small button batteries accessible. If ingested by children, the batteries may pose a chemical risk. The product does not comply with the requirements of the Toy Safety Directive and the relevant European standard EN 62115. [3]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: OtherCategory of measure(s): Import rejected at borderDate of entry into force: 09/07/2014 [3]
Report published 2014-07-11 · notifying country Spain · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
A musical doll wearing a wedding dress. Packaged in individual cardboard boxes bearing the brand name. The front is transparent. The back bears a label with information on the importer and the manufacturer, the CE marking, the reference number and a warning that the toy is not recommended for childr [4]
Reported risk explanation
null The product poses a chemical risk because it contains 23.5 % by weight of di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP). According to the REACH Regulation the phthalates DEHP, DBP and BBP are prohibited in all toys and childcare articles, while phthalates DINP, DIDP and DNOP are prohibited in toys or childcare articles that can be placed in the mouth by children.The battery compartment can easily be opened leaving the small button batteries accessible. If ingested by children, the batteries may pose a chemical risk. The product does not comply with the requirements of the Toy Safety Directive and the relevant European standard EN 62115. [4]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: OtherCategory of measure(s): Import rejected at borderDate of entry into force: 24/01/2014 [4]
Report published 2014-03-28 · notifying country Spain · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
A boy and girl doll in wedding outfits. The product is supplied in a cardboard box with a transparent front part. [5]
Reported risk explanation
null The product poses a chemical risk because the heads of the two dolls both contain di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) above the permitted levels (measured values: 25.5% and 24.7% by weight). Furthermore, a chemical risk can occur if the child swallows the button batteries, which can be easily accessed.The product does not comply with REACH Regulation, with the requirements of the Toy Safety Directive and the relevant European standard EN 62115. [5]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: OtherCategory of measure(s): Import rejected at borderDate of entry into force: 06/03/2014 [5]
Report published 2014-03-28 · notifying country Spain · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Plastic doll with long, red hair. The product is supplied in cardboard boxes with various inscriptions such as "Happy Every Day". The front of the box is transparent. [6]
Reported risk explanation
null The product poses a chemical risk because the head of the doll contains di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) above the permitted levels (measured value: 25.6% by weight). Furthermore, a chemical risk can occur if the child swallows the button batteries, which can be easily accessed.The product does not comply with REACH Regulation, with the requirements of the Toy Safety Directive and with the relevant European standard EN 62115. [6]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: OtherCategory of measure(s): Import rejected at borderDate of entry into force: 06/03/2014 [6]
Report published 2014-03-28 · notifying country Spain · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
Plastic doll with accessories. The product is supplied in cardboard boxes with a transparent part. [7]
Reported risk explanation
null The product poses a chemical risk because the head of the doll contains di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP) above the permitted levels (measured value: 29.8% by weight). Furthermore, a chemical risk can occur if the child swallows the button batteries, which can be easily accessed.The product does not comply with REACH Regulation, with the requirements of the Toy Safety Directive and with the relevant European standard EN 62115. [7]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: OtherCategory of measure(s): Import rejected at borderDate of entry into force: 06/03/2014 [7]
Report published 2014-02-21 · notifying country Spain · reported origin People's Republic of China
Reported product description
The product is a doll wearing a party dress. Description of packaging: the product is packed in a cardboard box bearing the brand name. The front of the box is transparent. [8]
Reported risk explanation
null The product poses a chemical risk because the head contains up to 22.33 % by weight of bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP). According to the REACH Regulation, phthalates DEHP, DBP and BBP are prohibited in all toys and childcare articles, while phthalates DINP, DIDP and DNOP are prohibited when the toy or the childcare article can be placed in the mouth by children The products pose an electro-chemical risk because the system for opening the button cell compartment might be easily open and the batteries may be swallowed by small children which can enact a short-circuit in the digestive system when they come into contact with liquids. The product does not comply with the Toys Directive and the relevant European standard EN 62115. [8]
Reported measures, verbatim
Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: OtherCategory of measure(s): Import rejected at borderDate of entry into force: 24/01/2014 [8]
9 distinct official alert references, published between 2014-02-21 and 2026-03-13. Counts describe the acquired reports, with no market denominator.
Report year
Recorded alerts
2014
8
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.
Chemical: 9 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.
8 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.
Plasticizer identity, material and use — what evidence do we have?
Identify the actual plasticizer/substance and polymer/component, with composition and use/exposure facts. Similar abbreviations or a general “phthalates” label do not resolve exact identity or applicable conditions. Keep concentrations and legal scope questions separate.
Useful evidence: Supplier substance/CAS/EC identities, composition and material records, sampled-component results and exact use/actor context.
Battery access, mouthing and ingestion context — what evidence do we have?
Compare the actual battery-compartment access, enclosure/retention, intended users and foreseeable handling described in the source. Trace the reported mouthing, swallowing or electrochemical-injury mechanism separately from operating or charging heat. Agree justified investigations and current criteria for your own configuration; this alert does not prescribe a universal test panel.
Useful evidence: Battery and compartment/retention drawings, opening/accessibility behavior, user/age and foreseeable handling facts, batch/revision records and relevant existing 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.
