Sock WholesalersPage last updated: October 30, 2026
OEKO-TEX: no file under our name, and the one place the standard is named
There is no OEKO-TEX file under our name. This page states that first, then sets out the single place on this site where the standard is named and what it is applied to, because a gap a buyer discovers late is worse than one stated early.
- No fileNo OEKO-TEX certificate under our name
- Standard 100The standard named for grip-dot silicone
- Appendix 4The infant limits that silicone is sent against
- One working dayFor a specific answer on your market
1. The gap, stated first
Gap. No OEKO-TEX file under our name. If your market requires one, say so in the brief — the reply then says what we can and cannot hold, rather than leaving the question to surface at the customs stage.
The same sentence, to the same effect, appears on the buyer pages for private-label brands, importers and distributors, retail chains, e-commerce sellers and pharmacy and medical: no OEKO-TEX, GRS or medical-device file under our name. It is not a line this site hides in one corner of one page.
A supplier page that prints a scheme it does not hold is worse than useless to a compliance desk, because the gap is found after the budget is committed. So this page prints the gap.
2. The one place the standard is named
On one style page the standard appears, and it appears as a working answer to a real question rather than as a badge. The question is the grip material, because those dots sit against bare skin on a yoga or ballet style:
If your market asks for a skin-contact or phthalate statement on the grip dots, the standard we work to is OEKO-TEX Standard 100, with the silicone sent against the Appendix 4 (infant) limits. Put the question in your first email and the answer travels with your quotation and the sample paperwork.
Read that sentence for what it is: the standard we work to on one component, asked for by a buyer, with the limits named. It is not a claim that the site holds an OEKO-TEX certificate for the product or the factory.
3. What our two audits are not
The floor holds a BSCI social audit and a SEDEX (SMETA) audit. Both cover the factory and how it is run. Neither of them is a material test report, and the site says so in the same paragraph that names them for the silicone styles: we will not present one as the other.
- BSCI 26-0419962: the factory, its working conditions and systems
- SEDEX (SMETA) ZAA600215648: the same factory, in the SMETA format
- Neither is a product test report or a chemical statement
- OEKO-TEX is the standard named for the grip-dot question
4. If your market requires one
- 01Name the scheme in the brief. OEKO-TEX Standard 100, GRS, a medical-device file — name which one and which market requires it.
- 02Get a specific reply. The reply says what we can and cannot hold, within one working day, instead of a general claim.
- 03Take what we do hold as it is. The BSCI and SEDEX scans are posted as PDFs and need no request: current versions, with numbers, holders and dates.
The schemes we do hold: BSCI and SEDEX. The gap list, in context: certification.
Tell us the scheme your market requires
Named in the first email, the answer is specific: which file we hold, which we do not, and what the standard we work to covers on the component in question.
sales@sockwholesalers.com, +86-13761030160. We answer every enquiry within one working day; replies come from Michelle Zhang, Export sales manager.