Case study

Casestudy: babywalkers

In April 1998, Liverpool Trading Standards issued a public statement alleging that 10 babywalkers — some manufactured by BPIA (then BPA) members — were unsafe. Parents were advised not to purchase these products, and an investigation was announced into models said to be non-compliant with safety standards.

The result of this action

Potential disaster for members

The impact was immediate and severe. The 10 brands named — many of them trusted household names — faced significant reputational damage alongside a direct hit to sales.

Recognising the seriousness of the situation, the Association acted swiftly. The then Managing Director assembled a team of leading experts, including safety consultants and testing houses, to build a robust and evidence-based response.

Robert Anslow, who worked closely with the Association at the time, recalls: “Hours and hours of work went into gathering information and compiling evidence to challenge the allegations. Lawyers and barristers were appointed, and together with one of the members involved, the case was heard in Liverpool Magistrates Court — and we won.”


The outcome was decisive. Reporting on the ruling, The Guardian (November 1999) stated that consumer protection officials had acted unlawfully in issuing the public warning. The court found that Liverpool City Council, supported by the Trade and Industry Secretary, had failed to follow the correct legal procedures set out under the Consumer Protection Act.

The Association, representing its members, successfully challenged the council in the High Court in London. Lord Bingham ruled that the established legal framework existed to safeguard both consumers and businesses — and that it had not been properly followed.

The Association contributed to three consultations and encouraged members and non-members to respond, even sharing wording that could be reused. When Government failed to publish the responses to the second consultation for more than two and a half years, the Association launched a Freedom of Information Act request.

In 2019, OPSS announced that a new approach regulation would eventually replace the old framework, with essential safety requirements underpinned by standards. The Association ensured that it secured a place on the relevant BSI committee, but recognising that standards development would take years, it continued to press Government to revise the current Regulations immediately.

Finally, in 2023, Government announced a consultation to amend the current Regulations and proposed removing the majority of baby products. The Association responded with support for that removal, backed by wider industry support. It also met with OPSS lead Richard Jude and queried products missing from the exclusion list, which was then updated.

Standing behind our members

  • Safety in numbers

    Julie Milne, General Manager of the BPIA, explains: “Thankfully, cases like the babywalker incident are rare. However, over the decades, members have faced allegations from consumer ‘watchdog’ organisations regarding product safety. As a trade association, we are here to have their back.
    We maintain a financial reserve specifically to support our members in these situations. When we believe a miscarriage of justice has occurred, we will stand alongside them — providing both the resources and the expertise needed to ensure a fair and just outcome.”

  • Why membership matters

    This case highlights a critical but often overlooked benefit of BPIA membership. Beyond advocacy, standards work and industry representation, membership provides reassurance.


    It means having a knowledgeable, well-resourced organisation in your corner — ready to act decisively when your business, your products, and your reputation are on the line.