FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

CPSIA: The effect on retail stores
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fashion-Incubator User Forum Forum Index -> CPSIA & Consumer Safety
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
RebeccaJester
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Dec 08, 2008 4:38 pm    Post subject: CPSIA: The effect on retail stores Reply with quote

Hi all. I'm just getting educated about this new law, and I have way more questions than I've found answers for. I apologize if this has been discussed already, if so just link me to the past discussion.

What kind of impact does this law have on the retailers? I understand as a manufacturer that I have the responsibility of getting my products tested/certifications etc. However, what about the small specialty shops that are selling my products? If they accept a shipment of product that has not been tested and has no certification and then sell those products, are they in violation of any laws? Will they have to research each of their product lines to make sure that the "reasonable testing" has been completed?

I ask, because if they too, are risking legal ramifications by selling products that may not have been accurately tested, they need to be educated about their risks and then join in on the fight against this new law.

Also, as a manufacturer, if I ship untested product in January, who is responsible for "getting it off the shelves" in Feb? I hope that makes sense.

Thanks for any info you can pass along!

Rebecca
Back to top
Kathleen F.
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Posts: 11339
Location: NM Albuquerque

PostPosted: Mon Dec 08, 2008 5:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This isn't a topic we've discussed in isolation, just brief mentions here and there but we need to. I've modified the subject line a bit to be more inclusive. Hopefully later I can update with what little I know. All I know is retailers are -understandably- playing "hot potato" with inventory.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
jhmac
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 8:07 am    Post subject: questions Reply with quote

I have retail stores and I am also wondering how we should handle items that have not been tested. I am sure we will not start getting items with the certificate right away. We do not sell children clothing but some of our clothing can be worn by someone under 14. From what I have read, 14 is the cut off age(I could be mistaken about that). I would like to what to expect after the law goes into effect.
Back to top
Kathleen F.
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Posts: 11339
Location: NM Albuquerque

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2008 8:54 am    Post subject: Re: questions Reply with quote

jhmac wrote:
From what I have read, 14 is the cut off age(I could be mistaken about that).

The *federal* cut off age is 12 and younger. Illinois is different; theirs is 16. Since Illinois' Attorneys General (and her second in line) are very aggressive about enforcing this issue, more so than the feds, it is not certain which standard will hold there. The matter of her second in command is an issue because the AG is on the short list for a CPSC position in the new administration.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
The Clever Kitty
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 8:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm curious about this to, and haven't seen an answer anywhere. I work for a shop that carries baby gifts, and I want to make sure to inform my boss of the CSPIA. But I don't know whose responsibility this is...is the manufacturer responsible for contacting the stores where their products are sold? Or is the store responsible for pulling items that have not been tested and sending them back to the manufacturer? If a product that has not been tested is sold after the cutoff date, who gets penalized, the manufacturer or the store or both??
Back to top
Kathleen F.
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Posts: 11339
Location: NM Albuquerque

PostPosted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 9:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

These are good questions.
The Clever Kitty wrote:
is the manufacturer responsible for contacting the stores where their products are sold?

I wouldn't know. I don't know if anyone knows *who* is responsible for notifying whom. Off hand, I'd guess it'd be up to retailers because as far as the manufacturer knows, you've sold them all. Why create problems? Anyway, since stores are holding the goods, it makes sense that they'd ask the manufacturer about their stock.
Quote:
Or is the store responsible for pulling items that have not been tested and sending them back to the manufacturer?

Well, first there should probably be a conversation about the items, testing and what to do about it. I wrote about that someplace today but can't find it to paste it in.
Quote:
If a product that has not been tested is sold after the cutoff date, who gets penalized, the manufacturer or the store or both??

This part is pretty clear, whoever sold it last, meaning the store.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
J C Sprowls



Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Posts: 2004

PostPosted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 11:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The *federal* cut off age is 12 and younger. Illinois is different; theirs is 16.

It's always best to tune any compliance policy to the most stringent standard. Of course, you have the option to not sell to anyone in IL if your product is marginally questionable.

But, I find it more efficient to not implement 'carve outs' into any policy. Either you do it or you don't. It should never be a part-time or conditional effort.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Guest






PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you for your quick response, Kathleen. That definitely clears things up for me a bit. I will inform my boss today.
Back to top
Kathleen F.
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Posts: 11339
Location: NM Albuquerque

PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2008 10:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's my update of down and dirty advice I posted to cabn for retailers:

Quote:
With regard to Diana's original question:
Quote:
I want to ask if anyone knows what will happen to products in inventory that were acquired prior to this new law being passed. Can they still be sold after February?

This is tricky to answer but I did deal with this specific question here: //fashion-incubator.com/archive/cpsia-and-small-manufacturers/

I'll try to be brief...I know there's a lot of retailers here so this advice is for them. And I apologize to my manufacturers in advance but I have to be honest.

If it is likely you're holding any children's products in inventory that does not comply on 2/10/09, you have very few choices, none of them palatable for either party.

1. ask the vendor to supply you with GCCs for the SKUs (note I said skus!) you're holding.

2. return the product to the vendor for testing.

3. if they cannot supply GCCs or are unwilling to test you will either have to return the product to the vendor and argue about a refund (they may go out of business) OR you'll have to get rid of these via your usual channels by feb 10, 2009.

4. you can have them tested yourself with the aforementioned XRF gun and can continue to sell these products until August at which time they will fall under the more stringent third party testing rule.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Esther
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 17 Mar 2006
Posts: 1911
Location: ID Spudville

PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

KB Toys just filed for bankruptcy.

They say it's because of a sudden drop in sales and the credit crunch. Reading between the lines, I would say the CPSIA has some impact. If their costs are already too high, they would have no chance with the CPSIA regulations.

Quote:
Sales were little changed from Feb. 3 until Oct. 4, KB Toys said. Since then, sales have dropped almost 20 percent, the company said.

“The liquidity crisis is directly attributable to a sudden and sharp decline in consumer sales,” Borst said in court documents.

McGowan said KB Toys also was hurt by “factors that were present in their first bankruptcy.” The company’s costs are too high, it struggles to compete with Wal-Mart, the toy industry isn’t growing much, and the retailer doesn’t carry video games, he said.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Pamela
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2008 3:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

We are a country of credit all the way. KB Toys owed more than $500 Million to creditors.

Pam
Back to top
J C Sprowls



Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Posts: 2004

PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2008 4:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

KB Toys is part of a larger corporation (which I used to work for) that has always operated near the bleeding edge. A lot of drama there; but, those companies under the umbrella have always been operated as if they were disposable.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Guest






PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2008 4:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How many retailers will be left in February? That is what EVERYONE should be focusing on... this law effects NO ONE if the consumer isn't buying and stores are closing faster than light travels. I have no idea why this is so important in light of the current retail sales picture.
Back to top
michael.martinez
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2008 4:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I wrote the above...

and will add, that tomorrow by midnight a MAJOR, MAJOR player in the retail business will (95% sure at this point) declare bankruptcy. If not this Friday, probably next Friday.

Here is a hint: You've all, most likely, done business in one form or another with them in the past.
Back to top
Fledgling
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 11:56 pm    Post subject: I'm asking for a friend because my English is better (sorta) Reply with quote

My friend is a retailer of brands from Japan. Understandably, the Japanese manufacturers are the ones obligated to comply. But my friend's shop is the exclusive retail outlet in the U.S. for one particular brand. ... So, logically, the retailer is obligated to comply??? Or find different complying brands? Not likely in Japan. She'd loose her shtick. These Japanese brands are her point of differentiation, her market advantage.

I think I've answered my own question. I'd would be a shame.
-N.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fashion-Incubator User Forum Forum Index -> CPSIA & Consumer Safety All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 1 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group