Dangerous baby sleeping bags from online marketplaces pose suffocation risk, Which? reveals
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 - e.g., 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.
Sue Davies, Which? Head of Consumer Protection Policy, said:
“It’s outrageous that dangerous baby sleeping bags are still being sold on online marketplaces.
“Our previous investigations showed this is part of a wider pattern: unsafe products are removed, only to resurface. The only way to break this cycle is by holding online marketplaces legally accountable, with tough penalties for failures.
“The PRaM Act is a good first step, but it must be backed by regulations that impose a clear legal duty, heavy fines, and stronger enforcement of consumer protection laws.”
-ENDS-
Right of replies:
An Amazon spokesperson said:
“We require all products offered in our store to comply with applicable laws, regulations and Amazon policies.
“The products flagged are not in scope of the safety alerts shared by Which?.
“If customers have concerns about an item they’ve purchased, we encourage them to contact our Customer Service directly so we can investigate and help resolve their issue.”
An eBay spokesperson said:
“Consumer safety is a top priority for eBay. We work diligently to keep our site safe and prevent prohibited listings through seller compliance audits, block filter algorithms for unsafe listings, and AI-supported monitoring by our team of in-house specialists.
“These proactive measures have prevented millions of potentially unsafe products from being listed every year. Listings that violate eBay policy, including those identified in this investigation, are swiftly removed.”
Notes to Editors:
Which? reviewed OPSS alerts for baby sleeping bags issued during March and April 2025, and analysed search engine results to check if identical or similar products were still for sale online.
BS EN 16781:2018 is the safety standard for baby sleeping bags
As a general rule, Which? recommends sticking to products from reputable brands and retailers that have been specifically designed for sleeping - unlike many of the products Which? found on online marketplaces. For more advice on how to put your baby to bed safely, see the safer sleep guides on the Lullaby Trust
The open letter has been signed by Associated Independent Stores, Association of Manufacturers of Domestic Appliances, Avon Fire and Rescue, Baby Products Industry Association, BAFE Fire Register, British Beauty Council, British Burns Association, British Independent Retailers Association, British Safety Council, British Safety Industry Federation, British Toy & Hobby Association, Cambridgeshire Fire and Rescue Service, The Chartered Trading Standards Institute, Child Accident Prevention Trust, Cleveland Fire Brigade, Consumer Friend, Cornwall Fire and Rescue Service, Cosmetic, Toiletry and Perfumery Association, Cumbria Fire and Rescue Service, Dorset & Wiltshire Fire and Rescue Service, Electrical Contractors’ Association, Electrical Safety First, The Entertainer, East Sussex Fire & Rescue Service, Essex County Fire and Rescue Service, FireChief Global, Fire Industry Association, FireQual, Halfords, Hampshire & Isle of Wight Fire, Institute of Fire Engineers, Institute of Fire Safety Managers, Lithium Ion Safety, Ladder Association, London Fire Brigade, Lullaby Trust, Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service, Mid and West Wales Fire and Rescue Service, Northamptonshire Fire and Rescue, National Fire Chiefs Council, Prestige Holdings, The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, Scottish Fire and Rescue Service, Shropshire Fire and Rescue Service, Smyths Toys, Staffordshire Fire and Rescue Service, Toymaster, Toy Retailers Association, Tyne and Wear Fire and Rescue Service, Ultimate Products, West Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service, Walpole, Which? and Zurich Insurance