Trsmima Recalls About 60,720 Backyard Zipline Kits; Notice Lists No Model or Serial Numbers
The CPSC notice, recall number 26632, published July 30, 2026, also covers about 19,120 separately sold spring brakes and cites 21 reports of kit components breaking and 19 of brakes failing. It identifies the products by description alone — there are no codes for owners to check.
By AI ReporterUpdated Aug 7, 2026, 11:24 a.m. ET
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission published a recall notice on July 30, 2026 covering about 60,720 TT Trsmima zipline kits and about 19,120 heavy duty stainless steel zipline spring brakes sold separately. The record for this story is that notice — recall number , posted in the recall database on July 30, 2026 — which identifies the firm as HuNanBoLuoDianZiShangWuYouXianGongSi D/B/A Trsmima, or Hunan Pineapple Electronic Commerce Co., Ltd., of China.
## How to tell whether yours is covered
The notice supplies no identifying codes. It lists no model numbers, no serial numbers, no date codes, no lot numbers and no UPCs for either the kits or the stand-alone spring brakes. The recall is defined by the product description alone.
That matters because the markings the notice does describe are not present on every unit. According to the , *some* of the zipline trolleys include the name "TT TRSMIMA" in white lettering and *some* of the plastic seats include a label stating in part, "Manufacturer Name: HuNanBoLuoDianZiShangWuYouXianGongSi." The separately sold Heavy Duty Stainless Steel Zipline Spring Brakes, the notice says, have black stoppers on each end and no labeling or instructions at all.
So an owner who finds no lettering on the trolley, no label on the seat, or nothing whatsoever on a spring brake has not established that the product falls outside the recall. There is no code in the notice against which to check. Anyone who bought a TT Trsmima zipline kit or a TT Trsmima stand-alone spring brake should treat it as covered and follow the remedy below.
## The hazard
According to the notice, the kit's steel cable, turnbuckle and seat can detach or break during use, posing a fall hazard. The zipline spring brakes are not stiff enough to safely slow a rider down, and the kit design does not include an emergency brake, posing collision and fall hazards.
The notice states the firm has received 21 reports of the turnbuckle, cable or seat included in the kit breaking or detaching during use, resulting in consumer falls and at least eight injuries such as fractures, sprains, bruises and scratches. It also states the firm has received 19 reports of the spring brake in the kit or the sold-separately spring brakes failing to safely slow a rider down, resulting in consumers colliding with trees and/or falling, including at least 12 injuries such as fractures, concussions and abrasions.
## What the products are
The recalled kits include components and instructions to install a 76- to 200-foot-long backyard zipline for use by both children and adults, according to the . Kit components include a cable, a turnbuckle or ratchet strap, a green or blue plastic seat, a waist belt or harness, a black or blue trolley, a spring brake and additional small hardware needed to complete the installation.
## The remedy
The says consumers should stop using the TT Trsmima zipline kits and zipline spring brakes immediately and contact Trsmima for a full refund. Consumers will be asked to uninstall the kits and destroy them by cutting the safety belt, seat rope and, if included in their model, the ratchet strap in half, then discard all kit components — including the cable, spring brake, turnbuckle and trolley — in the trash. Owners of the stand-alone spring brakes will be asked to dispose of them in the trash. Consumers of the kits and of the stand-alone brakes will both be asked to send photo(s) of the destroyed and discarded products to the firm to receive a full refund.
## Background on the type of device
For readers unfamiliar with the product: a zip line is a pulley, or trolley, suspended on a cable strung between two elevated anchor points, carrying a rider downhill by gravity, according to reference material from Wikipedia and ASTM International. A backyard kit is the do-it-yourself home version, sold as a single boxed consumer item and assembled in a garden between two trees or posts; larger commercial canopy tours and aerial adventure courses are covered by separate industry standards such as ASTM F2959. That background describes the type of device generally and says nothing about this recall.
Added a dedicated identification section stating plainly that the notice supplies no model numbers, serial numbers, date codes, lot numbers or UPCs, that the described markings appear on only some units and not at all on the stand-alone brakes, and that an unmarked unit is therefore not excluded; put that fact in the headline and dek. Named the record the details come from (CPSC recall notice, recall number 26632, posted July 30, 2026) in place of the vague "developing matter / only record cited here" line. Corrected the headline to attribute the recall to the firm rather than to the CPSC. Removed the sentence about the agency's database recording no other enforcement action by this firm, which the fact set does not support. Restored the notice's exact figures and wording (about 60,720; about 19,120; 21 reports; at least eight injuries; 19 reports; at least 12 injuries; 76- to 200-foot-long) and replaced the aggregated "40 reports / at least 20 injuries" framing in the dek with the two counts as the notice gives them.
Version 17 Aug 2026, 13:13
First published.
How we work
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.