How does the clothing law affect resale of used clothes ?

[blizzard77]

Watch for a CPSIA story in the Chicago Daily Herald NW edition within the next couple weeks. A CPSC spokeswoman (not sure if it's the same one) allegedly also made the same comment on OOAK goods being exempt from CPSIA regs to the reporter ( a friend/associate of mine.) The interview questions were submitted via email so the CPSC had time to consider their answers before reply.

Of course it doesn't matter until formalized but it is interesting.

[Kathleen F.]

Note to "Guest" or anyone who's not a registered user. If your posts are in the wrong place, they're moved. I just deleted one from guest from IP 67.183.194.37 after moving it over [url=//fashion-incubator.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=20920#20920]here[/url] but if you're not a registered member, it is impossible for me to notify you. So, don't presume your posts have been deleted, there is no way to inform you because I have no way to contact you. Of course, if you want to be notified of these things or when a given thread you're watching is updated, you can [url=//fashion-incubator.com/phpbb/viewforum.php?f=1]join us[/url] too.

[bestdressedsale]

FYI - I also read saw the online news story from tampa bay 10 news. I was initially relieved to see the "one of a kind items not needing to be tested" quote until another consignment sale owner client contacted me today.

She called the CSPC herself and actually talked to Julie Vallese, the CSPC person quoted in the Tampa Bay 10 news article.

Ms Vallese said she was misquoted in that article and the notion that consignment is exempt from CPSIA is incorrect.

Here is the link to the article so you will know what I am talking about. Remember, this article is incorrect per Julie Vallese at the CPSC.

http://www.tampabays10.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=96355

[Kathleen F.]

I have nothing to add to this other than to verify that what bestdressedsale has said above, is true. Julie was misquoted out of context. What she said was that ooak obviously couldn't be unit tested, not that it was exempt.

[DR]

So, this is our second day being open on our "last month" for our children's consignment store. Many of our customers are beside themselves that we are closing due to the CPSIA. Everyone so far says that have not heard of the improvement act. Several months ago, the local Nautica outlet store gave our shop many, many boxes of their small and medium hangars because they were not going to sell children's clothing anymore. The manager did not know why, but it's all clear to us now. Other local shops are going to "stick it out". Thanks to everyone for posting all the great info. I wish more retailers knew about this. We're telling everyone.

[chic]

I spoke with the National Association of Resale and Thrifts this afternoon. I asked if they felt that since the goods were manufactured prior to Feb 10th they would be exempt and I was told absolutely NOT. That this affects every second hand and consignment shop that sells anything (toys, books, and clothes) for children. www.narts.org I was advised to change by business, find a way to comply with testing or be forced to close.

[Guest]

Future signs will read.

Soccer Mom's Black Market opening soon at a location near you.

[Amanda @ The Mom Crowd]

Hi Everyone!

I received this this morning from San Antonio Fox News Anchorwoman, Bianca Vanezuela - "Looks like legislators are taking note. Check out yesterdays LA Times. Local Goodwill says they arent to worried. Nationally they are working closely with the powers that be and believe changes will be made before February
10th. I'll keep you posted.
Bianca"

Here is a link to the most recent LA Times article:
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-lead7-2009jan07,0,6917858.story

~Amanda
http://www.themomcrowd.com

[Kathleen F.]

This was posted a couple of places here, the media thread for sure.

Caveat: some of the reporting in this article is inaccurate (have had to refute it umpteen times since yesterday). It is not true that broad exemptions were passed for natural fibers. Only natural unprocessed (meaning undyed, printed, etc etc) goods meaning unbleached cotton muslin etc. Very few garment producers used unadulterated fabrics so this ruling has little effect.

[DAMC]

[Kathleen F.]

Moving stuff from yet another resale thread:

[Guest]

I found this interesting. Although it doesn't expressly address resale shops, it does address existing inventory.

http://www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/advisory/317.pdf

[catertot]

CPSC Clarifies Requirements of New Children’s Product Safety Laws Taking Effect in February
Guidance Intended for Resellers of Children’s Products, Thrift and Consignment Stores
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In February 2009, new requirements of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) take effect. Manufacturers, importers and retailers are expected to comply with the new Congressionally-mandated laws. Beginning February 10, 2009, children’s products cannot be sold if they contain more than 600 parts per million (ppm) total lead. Certain children’s products manufactured on or after February 10, 2009 cannot be sold if they contain more that 0.1% of certain specific phthalates or if they fail to meet new mandatory standards for toys.

Under the new law, children’s products with more than 600 ppm total lead cannot lawfully be sold in the United States on or after February 10, 2009, even if they were manufactured before that date. The total lead limit drops to 300 ppm on August 14, 2009.

The new law requires that domestic manufacturers and importers certify that children’s products made after February 10 meet all the new safety standards and the lead ban. Sellers of used children’s products, such as thrift stores and consignment stores, are not required to certify that those products meet the new lead limits, phthalates standard or new toy standards.

The new safety law does not require resellers to test children’s products in inventory for compliance with the lead limit before they are sold. However, resellers cannot sell children’s products that exceed the lead limit and therefore should avoid products that are likely to have lead content, unless they have testing or other information to indicate the products being sold have less than the new limit. Those resellers that do sell products in violation of the new limits could face civil and/or criminal penalties.

When the CPSIA was signed into law on August 14, 2008, it became unlawful to sell recalled products. All resellers should check the CPSC Web site (www.cpsc.gov) for information on recalled products before taking into inventory or selling a product. The selling of recalled products also could carry civil and/or criminal penalties.

The agency intends to focus its enforcement efforts on products of greatest risk and largest exposure. While CPSC expects every company to comply fully with the new laws resellers should pay special attention to certain product categories. Among these are recalled children’s products, particularly cribs and play yards; children’s products that may contain lead, such as children’s jewelry and painted wooden or metal toys; flimsily made toys that are easily breakable into small parts; toys that lack the required age warnings; and dolls and stuffed toys that have buttons, eyes, noses or other small parts that are not securely fastened and could present a choking hazard for young children.

The agency has underway a number of rulemaking proposals intended to provide guidance on the new lead limit requirements. Please visit the CPSC website at www.cpsc.gov for more information.

http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml09/09086.html

[Guest]

[Guest]