2 September 2025
In a snapshot investigation, the consumer champion found that online marketplaces have been allowing the sale of baby sleeping bags similar or identical to products that were officially recalled by the Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) for suffocation risks.
A common characteristic of the products found by Which? is that they include hoods which could cover a baby's head and face and result in suffocation. The inclusion of hoods does not comply with The British Standards Institution's safety standards for this reason.
Some of the sleeping bags Which? looked at, such as a teddy bear-style blanket on Amazon Marketplace, didn't have arm holes. Sleeping bags must have arm openings to meet the safety standard. Those without can cause a baby to slip down inside the sleeping bag, covering their face and risking suffocation.
Which? also found a sack-style sleeping bag listing on eBay which shows a baby being positively swamped by this item. The hazardous nature of these products is by no means difficult to spot and even where products don't look similar or identical to those included in Government recalls, a simple visual check is enough to confirm whether baby sleeping bags have hoods, or are missing arm holes.
Which? is urging shoppers to avoid baby sleeping bags with hoods or excess material, such as large bows or other novelty additions. These risk covering a baby's head and face while they move around in their sleep. It's best to always use a sleeping bag with arm holes as these help to stop babies slipping down inside the bag. The Lullaby Trust, a charity which aims to reduce unexpected death in infancy, strongly advises against letting babies sleep in products that restrict their movement or position them in a way that could block their airway.
Other things to avoid include products sold as multipurpose items - for example, a swaddle, a stroller cover, and a baby cocoon as well as a sleeping bag. Baby sleeping bags have to conform to strict standards.
Which? is concerned that these products continue to be sold despite market surveillance undertaken by the OPSS earlier this year. The regulator undertook test purchasing for a range of items sold online, including baby sleeping products, and 'worked with online marketplaces to remove the listings'.
While the OPSS investigation led to the recall of a number of products, Which? Found 35 potentially lethal sleeping bags still being sold just four months later. This is in keeping with a pattern the consumer champion has seen time and again: products are taken down from online platforms only for similar or identical products to reappear. Additionally, over a week after Which? reported these items to the marketplaces, it found two dozen similarly dangerous products still for sale.
Which?'s findings suggest that the OPSS' efforts on baby sleeping bags had a limited impact on online marketplaces. That a major intervention by the OPSS has clearly failed to make a lasting change to online marketplaces exposes the futility of the UK's current approach to product safety.
Which? campaigned for years for the Product Regulation and Metrology Act (PRaM Act), which recently received Royal Assent. Which? is calling for the secondary regulations currently being developed by the Government to include a clear and strong duty on online marketplaces to prevent the sale of unsafe products, and backed up by tough penalties. Regulators such as Trading Standards and the OPSS must be properly equipped with strong enforcement powers to enforce this and put a stop to the sale of these dangerous products.
Which? has co-signed an open letter delivered today to Business Minister Justin Madders demonstrating a broad consensus among UK businesses, consumer groups and public safety organisations in favour of secondary regulations that introduce a clear duty to make online marketplaces accountable for the safety of all products sold, and to empower regulators to bring strong penalties for non-compliance. This will benefit both consumers and the UK economy. The open letter has been signed by dozens of organisations including CTSI, Electrical Safety First and the London Fire Brigade - the assembled trade groups behind the letter represent hundreds of companies.
(Source: Which?, 28 August 2025)
For general information, please see our 'Product safety' section.