Reply
Highlighted
Respected Contributor
Posts: 2,954
Registered: ‎01-30-2015

Re: CA Prop 65 and QVC not shipping items

Why cant they just put the warning label on it like everyoneelse does? They wouldnt ship my Judith Ripka ring..I work in the auto industry in CA and am well aware of the law..I have no problem with it- It just says you have to disclose if it is potentially hazardous..So why not do THAT, QVC?

 

EG: think of the millions of workers, who walked into a hazardous workplace for example, with no knowledge of potentialy dangerous chemicals or substances (like asbestos, or formaldehyde, for example) and then later suffered the consequences of exposure..Perhaps if they had known, they would have had a CHOICE to NOT work there...i have no problem with this...

Highlighted
New Contributor
Posts: 4
Registered: ‎02-05-2017

Re: CA Prop 65 and QVC not shipping items

I just tried to order some Mizrahi jeans and a Halston sweater only to find they can’t be shipped to California. I’m baffled, as I have bought plenty from these brands before. I understand adding a warning, but it’s my choice to purchase or not. QVC, please let the consumer make the decision. It’s disappointing to spend the time to pick something out and not be able to buy it. Am I misunderstanding other posts that say QVC is choosing not to ship in lieu of adding a warning? 

Highlighted
Frequent Contributor
Posts: 144
Registered: ‎03-11-2017

Re: CA Prop 65 and QVC not shipping items

I totally agree with what was said earlier. I live in California and lots and LOTS of items have a Prop 65 warning sticker or label on the packaging and the items are still sold here. I have NO idea why QVC would think they cannot ship so many items to California. This is really unheard of in the online ordering world. Amazon would probably be out of business if they followed this ridiculous rule. What are you doing QVC???

Highlighted
New Contributor
Posts: 4
Registered: ‎02-05-2017

Re: CA Prop 65 and QVC not shipping items

Just happened to me too!

Highlighted
Trusted Contributor
Posts: 1,606
Registered: ‎10-11-2017

Re: CA Prop 65 and QVC not shipping items


@cozyseeker wrote:

I totally agree with what was said earlier. I live in California and lots and LOTS of items have a Prop 65 warning sticker or label on the packaging and the items are still sold here. I have NO idea why QVC would think they cannot ship so many items to California. This is really unheard of in the online ordering world. Amazon would probably be out of business if they followed this ridiculous rule. What are you doing QVC???


Maybe Qvc has decided the cost to print millions of Prop 65 warning stickers does not justify the number of orders from Ca especially when returns are figured into the equation.

 

So, if the number of orders doesn't cover the cost of paying for California's warning stickers, why should they?  Better to have the state of ca pay for it and ship them to Qvc.

Highlighted
Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 5,981
Registered: ‎03-23-2010

Re: CA Prop 65 and QVC not shipping items


@puttypiesmom wrote:

@cozyseeker wrote:

I totally agree with what was said earlier. I live in California and lots and LOTS of items have a Prop 65 warning sticker or label on the packaging and the items are still sold here. I have NO idea why QVC would think they cannot ship so many items to California. This is really unheard of in the online ordering world. Amazon would probably be out of business if they followed this ridiculous rule. What are you doing QVC???


Maybe Qvc has decided the cost to print millions of Prop 65 warning stickers does not justify the number of orders from Ca especially when returns are figured into the equation.

 

So, if the number of orders doesn't cover the cost of paying for California's warning stickers, why should they?  Better to have the state of ca pay for it and ship them to Qvc.


If QVC had to print all those stickers, I'm guessing the cost would be passed on to the customers--even those outside of California.  I agree that since Californians want the labels, they should have to pay for them.

Highlighted
New Member
Posts: 1
Registered: ‎10-02-2014

Re: CA Prop 65 and QVC not shipping items

I ordered something from QVC 2-3 years ago. They are a ok of 2 solar globes for outside in the garden. They twinkle at night & love them. One broke during a windy evening when something fell on 1 & it broke. The other is still going strong.

I saw them online yesterday and tried to order a set. NOW they can't send to me in CA because of revisions to Prop 65 CA.
It seems to me that the law requires a warning label. Amazon sells tons of these labels.
Why is QVC refusing to ship to CA, when it seems they just don't want to spend the $$ for the labels.

Boggles my mind that I have the same item in my yard, but can't get another set. WHAT SEEMS TO BE THE PROBLEM 'QVC'??? BUY SOME ****** STICKERS - excuse me, HAVE CHINA OR JAPAN OR WHOEVER PUT STICKERS ON. If they don't want to comply with our laws, especially CA, then stop buying their products. It's unfair to sell to 49 states & screw over CA residents.
THIS IS NOT THE 1ST TIME THIS HAS HAPPENED TO ME.
Maybe I'll check Amazon b4 QVC.
Highlighted
Respected Contributor
Posts: 3,884
Registered: ‎12-12-2010

Re: CA Prop 65 and QVC not shipping items

Relax @BlondThought238. I live in one of the other 49 states (Hawai’i) and believe me when I say there are PLENTY of items QVC won’t ship to me. I just order it elsewhere.

It isn’t how long you live that matters; it is how well you are prepared to die.
Highlighted
Respected Contributor
Posts: 2,591
Registered: ‎10-04-2015

Re: CA Prop 65 and QVC not shipping items

Sorry, this article is a little long but I just copied it all... 

 

Lately, there's been a curiously increasing problem for people living in California. When they try to order certain products online, they're finding that the retailer won't ship to them, simply because of where they live. The cause boils down to legislation that dates back to a time before online retail, but is being more heavily enforced today. 

 

It's called The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, or more succinctly put, California Proposition 65.

 

Some confuse the law as a ban on products but that's not what it is at all. Simply put, it requires companies to list warnings on products that contain certain chemicals or substances that that state has determined to be cancer or birth defect-causing agents. It's been a contentious law, to say the least, and it's a long list, currenty up to 22 pages. 

 

It's not that the these substances will cause these problems with certainty, especially not in the trace amounts that those products may contain, just they have the potential.

 

It's not an easy subject to understand but it's also not a new law, so why has it caused new problems? Part of it has to do with a deadline. The list of substances was amended and updated in August 2016 and now contains stricter language regarding warning labels.

 

Manufacturers were given two-years to comply with the new labeling requirements and so, as of August 30th 2018, if they were not compliant, they could not ship or sell products into California, either on their own or through retail.

 

This presents a problem for some of the bigger retailers that source products from overseas manufacturers that are either ignorant of the law or don't want to comply with it. Enforcing warning labels is tricky business. It can cause undue fear in consumers and if only one state is demanding it, manufacturers still have to apply the label to all inventory to remain cost effective on the assembly line. That could be a public relations problem for some.

 

What does this mean for the consumer?

Though manufacturers were given two years to become compliant, there have been some that missed the deadline and continue to fall short. Sadly, retailers has been forced into the unenviable job of being the messenger. We've seen error messages at retail sites like this, "Due to warning requirements imposed in California by Proposition 65, we cannot ship any items to California at this time," on wide variety of products, from tennis shoes to patio furniture. And it's not just unknown or small retailers. QVC, Hayneedle, Academy Sports, Walmart, and even Amazon have had to deliver the bad news.

 

The thing to remember is that this is not primarily the fault of the retailer. The responsibility of compliance is on the manufacturer. True, the retailer could be more forceful about only selling compliant goods, but supply chains are built over years and contracts have to be honored, so we probably won't see the end of this problem for a year or more, at least.

Highlighted
Respected Contributor
Posts: 3,067
Registered: ‎03-10-2010

Re: CA Prop 65 and QVC not shipping items

[ Edited ]

When one buys jeans that smell of rat poison and gasoline it is unhealthy to wear or to even wash with other clothing. The micro beads that used to be in face washes were ending up in the ocean and in the food chain.

Certain companies mix medicines in cement mixers with all sorts of nasty chemicals. As one on blood pressure medicine, I am very aware of this dangerous situation.

Putting melamine plastics in pet foods is deadly..

It may seem a problem to deal with and dissapointing. I, for one, and very happy that California is pro-active in this regard.

By labeling products, It gives you the consumer the right to DECIDE, whether you want to purchase.

If a retailer doesn't want to label, as a consumer, it makes me wary.