Knowler — recall non-compliance (ESR power banks, Citro-Soda)

News24, 17/18 April 2026 · Wendy Knowler

Why the site cites this

The article documents two distinct recall non-compliance patterns at Takealot:

1. ESR HaloLock Kickstand wireless power bank, Model 2G505B — global recall (NCC issued a SA recall notice ~April 2026). Two named consumers (Ben Hart, Mahendren Chetty) bought the unit through Takealot in Oct/Nov 2024. Both were refused refunds when they sought them post-recall, on the basis that the manufacturer’s 12-month warranty had expired. Takealot’s PR agency declined to respond to Knowler’s query.
2. Citro-Soda Regular — SAHPRA recall (foreign-material contamination — metal fragments). Monogran Naidoo notified by Takealot, product collected, but the refund issued was a coupon valid for two days that expired in his spam folder before he saw it.

These cases ground a new clause on recall non-compliance anchored on CPA s 60 (the NCC’s safety-monitoring and recall power) read with the substantive refund rights under s 19 / s 55 / s 56, plus s 58 (the standalone supplier-warning duty) — and the basic principle that a recall remedy is not extinguished by warranty expiry.

Verbatim extracts (fair-dealing quotations)

The recall notice

“Among the 18 product recalls announced by the National Consumer Commission (NCC) so far this year was a wireless power bank sold online by retailers including Takealot between 2023 and 2024. It’s the ESR HaloLock Kickstand wireless power bank, Model 2G505B.”

“According to the Chinese manufacturer ESR, the power bank presents a risk of fire as its lithium-ion batteries can overheat while in use, and there have been 20 reports of them catching fire and exploding, mainly in the US and Canada.”

“Consumers in possession of the affected products are urged to immediately stop using them and return them to a point of purchase for a refund.” — NCC recall notice

Hart’s case

Ben Hart bought the unit in October 2024 for around R1,000. About a year later — weeks after manufacturer warranty expired — it stopped charging properly and felt hot. He discovered the global recall, then emailed Takealot:

“I pointed out that, by my understanding, the Consumer Protection Act requires them to respect the recall.”

“But after much back and forth, Takealot ultimately chose to ignore this. Their final response was that they could not confirm the recall and therefore absolved themselves of any responsibility.”

(Hart was refunded by ESR directly after engaging the manufacturer.)

“I pointed out again to Takealot that if anyone on their side had merely emailed the manufacturer, they could have received the same response, but they still stonewalled me.”

Chetty’s case

“A few days later, Mahendren Chetty emailed me to say he’d also bought the now-recalled ESR power bank from Takealot in November 2024, and when he read a report about the NCC’s recall notice, he contacted the online retailer about a refund – as instructed by the commission.”

“But Takealot told him: ‘There is a 12-month warranty on the product, which expired on 12 Nov 2025 … The item is well out of warranty.’”

“Despite explaining the significance of a safety recall and attaching the news report in question, Chetty said, he got the same response and was advised to contact the manufacturer.”

Takealot’s response to Knowler’s query (verbatim)

“Takealot will not be responding to this query.” — Takealot’s PR agency (quoted in the article)

The Citro-Soda case (Naidoo)

“Monogran Naidoo told me that he was notified of the recall by Takealot, which collected the product from him.”

“But the initially promised – and legally required – refund/credit didn’t materialise. Instead, he was issued a voucher, which he didn’t see until it went to his spam folder, he told me.”

“Notably, it was valid for just two days and had expired before he became aware of it, leaving him effectively without the product and without compensation.”

“A Takealot representative explained the ridiculously short validity time, saying, ‘It was time-sensitive due to the nature of the campaign.’ With respect, that makes no sense.”

Takealot’s eventual remediation (Citro-Soda only)

“Following the recall announcement, Takealot engaged all affected customers as per our standard recall procedures, offering a refund in the form of the original payment method. In Mr Naidoo’s case, full payment for the recalled product was made via a promotional coupon. As per our refund and coupons policy, we reissued the original coupon aligned to the original coupon terms and conditions, including the limited time validity period.”

“As a gesture of goodwill, we have now credited Mr Naidoo the full value of the original coupon, not just the value of the recalled product.”

Knowler’s framing

“Consumers are entitled to a refund when returning a recalled product, and not one that is only valid for two days.”

“I have reported Takealot’s recall responses to the NCC and await its response.”

Site reliance

• CPA s 60 (Safety monitoring and recall) — the NCC’s power to direct safety-monitoring and recall procedures where goods present an unreasonable risk of harm. The recall direction is the regulatory hook, not a self-executing supplier duty. A supplier ignoring a recall direction contravenes the recall regime.
• CPA s 55 + s 56 — the substantive route to a refund. A recall direction by the regulator means the goods are authoritatively determined to fail s 55. The s 56 implied warranty applies and the consumer elects repair / replacement / refund — within six months of delivery, irrespective of any private-warranty calendar. “Warranty has expired” is not a defence.
• CPA s 58 (Warning concerning fact and nature of risks) — supplier-warning duty in plain language. Where a recall has been published and a supplier still represents the product as safe (e.g. on the live listing), the s 58 duty has been breached and the listing is compoundable as a s 41 misrepresentation.
• CPA s 19 — right to refuse non-conforming delivery. Reactivated, in effect, when the regulator determines the goods are unsafe.
• NCC enforcement — recalls fall within the NCC’s powers under Chapter 3. Non-compliance with a recall direction is a contravention, separately actionable.
• Refund mechanics — a recalled product cannot be effectively credited via a 2-day-validity coupon. The refund must be substantively equivalent to the consideration paid.

Wayback / archive status

No Wayback Machine snapshot for this URL as of 2026-05-07. Verbatim text from authenticated subscription capture, 2026-05-07.