Office Chair 315 Exposure
The issues exposed during the 315 event regarding office chairs mainly focus on substandard quality, including problems with stability, caster wear, and formaldehyde emissions. The popular 'Liu Liu Stool' also has serious quality issues.
Substandard Quality of Office Chairs
According to a sampling inspection by the State Administration for Market Regulation, among the 101 batches of office chair products produced by 101 enterprises nationwide, 15 batches were found to be unqualified, with a non-compliance rate of 14.9%. Among them, the issue of substandard stability was particularly prominent, with 7 batches of products having this problem. Stability is an important indicator for assessing whether an office chair meets quality standards. An office chair with poor stability is prone to tipping over when the user leans forward, backward, or sits sideways, potentially causing injury to the consumer. The enterprises involved include seven companies such as Foshan Shouyu Furniture Co., Ltd. and Huizhou Branch of Shenzhen Jialewei Dun Furniture Co., Ltd.
In addition, there are issues with substandard caster reciprocating wear and substandard formaldehyde emissions. Substandard caster reciprocating wear can affect the service life and smooth movement of the office chair; substandard formaldehyde emissions pose a potential threat to the health of users, and long-term exposure may cause respiratory diseases and allergic reactions.
Quality Issues of the Popular 'Liu Liu Stool'
Although the popular 'Liu Liu Stool' is not a traditional office chair, as a seat that may be used in office settings, it has also been exposed to have serious quality issues. In September 2026, a popular 'Liu Liu Stool' priced at 89.9 yuan was disassembled by consumers and found to be filled with moldy wooden boards, used sponges, and even construction waste. This product was produced by Xiamen Yunqi Furniture Co., Ltd., which had been established for only three months, and was sold in top live-streaming rooms such as Jiaogepeng and Dongfangzhenxuan. Although the merchant showed a test report claiming that the product was qualified, netizens pointed out that the test was a commissioned submission, which could only prove that the submitted samples were qualified and did not represent that all products were qualified. The Jiaogepeng live-streaming room has admitted that the issue is true and has initiated a 'refund without return' advance compensation.
