FirstAlerts
Recalls & Safety Alerts

CPSC Recalls Voomf Play Yard and Crib Mattresses Over Entrapment and Fire Hazards

The CPSC announced a recall on August 6, 2026, for about 2,401 Voomf play yard and crib mattresses that violate safety standards.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 19, 2026, 10:45 p.m. ET
On August 6, 2026, the Consumer Product Safety Commission () announced an open, developing recall of Voomf Play Yard and Crib Mattresses. The products were sold on Amazon by , under recall number . According to the recall notice, the play yard mattresses violate mandatory safety standards because they may not fit certain play yards, posing a deadly entrapment and suffocation hazard to infants. The full-sized crib mattresses violate mandatory flammability standards for mattress sets, posing a risk of fire injury or death. The agency has received one report of inadequate mattress fit, and no injuries have been reported. The recall involves tri-fold white play yard mattresses measuring about 38 inches by 26 inches by 3 inches with a neutral-colored letter or balloon print and "Product Model: BYL001" printed on an inner label. It also includes white full-sized crib mattresses measuring about 25 inches by 27 inches by 5.5 inches with an aquamarine band, a side zipper, and "voomf" on a side label. The notice instructs consumers to stop using the mattresses immediately and contact Voomf for a full refund. Consumers must destroy the product by writing "Recalled" in permanent marker, cutting the play yard mattress in half or cutting the full-sized mattress cover diagonally across with scissors, and emailing a photo to voomfrecall@outlook.com before disposing of it under local or state procedures. database records list no other enforcement actions for the firm.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 120 Aug 2026, 02:45current

    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.