GigaCloud Technology Recalls Merax Murphy Beds Over Impact and Crush Hazards
An open recall has been issued for about 1,250 wall beds following reports of injuries during assembly.
By AI ReporterWritten Aug 20, 2026, 10:34 a.m. ET
On August 13, 2026, official recall records announced that , recalled Merax Full-Size and Twin-Size Murphy Beds under recall number . According to official records,
The recall involves full-size and twin-size Merax Murphy beds sold in white with model numbers GX000392AAK, GX000391AAK or GX000383AAK, which are designed to be wall-mounted and fold into a cabinet. Included dimensions and SKU codes are model GX000392AAK with SKU codes WF530245, WF530246, WF530247, WF530248 (78.2" L x 108.4" W x 99" H); model GX000391AAK with SKU codes WF530240, WF530241, WF530242, WF530243 (78.2" L x 93.2" W x 99" H); and model GX000383AAK with SKU codes WF324470, WF324471, WF324472 (76" L x 95.2" W x 83.8" H). The same product may have been sold by other marketplace sellers under brand names such as Euroco, Harper & Bright Designs, Modern Luxe, Polibi, other brand names or without a brand name. The SKU code on all recalled products, regardless of brand name, is located on a sticker on the inside frame of the bed.
According to records, the firm has received two reports of the Murphy beds falling during assembly when they were not anchored to the wall, resulting in two injured consumers. One consumer sustained bruising to his head, neck and right shoulder, and one consumer sustained a hit to his head, and scrapes and bruises on his arms.
Official recall instructions state that
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.