UKH

https://www.gov.uk/product-safety-alerts-reports-recalls/product-recall-sim....

and...

https://contents.mediadecathlon.com/p2597477/k$7a2c7e55be20885dab229fa20d7f...

Why only the 80m and 100m?

Possibly that a problem has been identified in a particular production 'run' - which was only used for making those two lengths. Would explain, too, why it only applies to the pink ones [I think that's what 'red' means - and I notice that the colour is only mentioned in one of the notices].

This is, of course, speculation. IANARM.

< [.... and I notice that the colour is only mentioned in one of the notices].

Although that's probably specified in the model and item codes.

Edited to correct punctuation - obviously!

Shows that they have good record keeping and the value of such records in the case of a failure. 

Simmond/Decathlon's line: "Although this rope complies with current standards, it does not meet our quality requirements and our commitment to ensuring maximum safety for climbers."

Whilst on Gov.uk "The product does not meet the requirements of the Personal Protective Equipment (Enforcement) Regulations 2018 and Regulation (EU) 2016/425 on personal protective equipment."

I'm guessing that both of these statements can be technically true (can they?), the do give very different impressions don't they?

That's interesting. I don't know much about this sort of thing, but presumably the relevant standard is EN892. Does that include a cut resistance test? What does the PPE regulations reference if it's not the EN?

It is.

It does not.

This does seem odd!

Got to laugh... But I guess it just hasn't been replaced yet? I thought there was a time limit?

The referenced regulation doesn't call out any ENs directly, it just says that the product needs to undergo a "relevant conformity assessment" in clause 5.2 (to avoid having to reissue the regulation if standards are broken up or upissued I guess).

I am now confused as I thought that there was an indefinite delay to mandatory UKCA marking rather than CE marking, unless the wording just hasn't been updated to reflect the indefinite delay (they really have made a total pigs ear of legislation following Brexit).

... they refer to 'Simmond'...

Indeed; although it appears correctly at the head of that page. I assume it was simply carelessness on the part of whoever was filling in the relevant form.

The rope itself is, of course, 8,9mm - not the 9mm quoted in both notices.

Thought it looked wrong when I read that, but I went ahead and repeated their mistake when I posted!  Should have trusted my instinct!

Simond is the brand of rope and Decathlon own Simond.
So, both are sort of correct, but if you Google 'Decathlon Climbing Ropes' you will get a drop down menu from the resultant page of various brands of which Simond is one and Decathlon isn't.

Perhaps I wasn't clear. Captain P had pointed out that Simond appears as 'Simmond' on the linked gov.uk page [in the 'Product information' section]. I added the observation that the name is printed correctly - ie 'Simond' - at the head of the same page.

Fair enough, my mistake...

Does that mean "I am not a real man" Ian? That's a new acronym on me! 😂

I got one of those, 80m version, and it's a workhorse, one of the best ropes I've ever had. The sheath hasn't worn out yet so I must have bought it before those dates.

I've had the same experience as you, with both the 80m and the 100m, although the latter hasn't seen as much use as the 80.

Similar here. I had one that's had a lot of use and held up really well, especially for a fairly skinny rope. Mine was within the recall dates though, so of course being a good, god fearing man I returned it for a full refund.

Another good experience here. One fluffy spot, but nothing worse than I'd expect for the amount of work it's done 

Me too. Really hard wearing, despite a ropey start...