Beneft Doing Recall On Gimme Brow(It Was In The TSV)

ShoppingTelly

Help Support ShoppingTelly:

"If applied in its normal usage on the brows, the Gimme Brow product doesn’t involve any risk.
However, if it comes into contact with the eyes, it could lead to eye irritation"

So what's in it?

:mysmilie_10:
 
The recall info is a bit vague. No manufacturing to-from dates, no batch numbers. the only thing you can assume is that if you got GB in the old packaging you are good to go (if unopened, of course).

QVC and Benefit should be responding to customers who buy of QVC - are batches/batch numbers supplied to QVC affected or not? Even just to say that they are investigating and will confirm details shortly! Just something to show they care would be nice...
 
I've just bought the Gimme Brow as an individual item from QVC. I've got blonde eyebrows so bought it to apply so that you see I've actually got brows.

I'm probably being a typical blonde here but how would you get it in your eyes if it's a brow product? ��
 
Is there a chance that is might flake and drop into the eyes?

I am blond but use Hourglass brow product in blond, they have a few different blond shades. The thing with blond brow products they can be rather red in tone, Hourglass is not.
 
Still a mystery about this? I asked in House of Fraser about the recall and they said it was the holiday globe set, but they still had them all on sale! Also does not specify in the recall from Benefit themselves.

Seems its something to do with the pigment in the product.
 
Okay, I message Jane The British Beauty Blogger and asked if she knew. She did reply saying as far as she heard it was the US only. But, she is going to look into it further to see if the UK is effected.
 
I am shocked that the basic principles of managing negative news stories has escaped both Benefit and QVC: communicate, communicate, communicate. Allow people to know what is going on, allow them to understand if they are affected, allow them to return the product for a refund. Simples. Better to take a short-term financial hit than a long-term hit on trust in your brand. It really isn't rocket science, but so many companies appear incapable of understanding that you take the short-term pain for the long-term gain. They persist in thinking they can have it both ways. News flash to them: you can't!!
 
Now why couldn't something as clearly explained as that have come from Benefit, or QVC?

Well done and thank you to Jane. I dare say when stock is replenished, in the US at least it will say "do not use on eyelashes" or similar. Basically, with apologies to any US readers here, the law in the US doesn't seem to ask what "would the man on the Clapham omnibus do" , but rather it asks "what would the brainless idiot do" with no allowances for an iota of common sense. Unfortunately I think the law in the UK is drifting in the same direction...
 
It's in QVCs interest to be red hot on things like this, not because they care about their customers health, they clearly don't they just care about the money, but as the saying goes "where there's blame, there's a claim"
 

Latest posts

Back
Top