Guide
Error 1545133: investigate the exact rejection.
Code 2 is broad. Preserve subcode 1545133 and the failed message format before deciding whether a failure is temporary or recipient-specific.
3 minute read
What to do
Do not repeatedly retry the same comment. Check whether its private reply is still eligible and whether the recipient has responded before sending an ordinary follow-up.
If every send fails for hours, check Meta’s platform status before you change the rule text.
Investigate format and recipient before retrying
A broad code 2 can describe a temporary platform failure, but the subcode deserves its own investigation. Reachlee reports 1545133 when rich messages or media are refused for non-followers, including opening button templates. Its report is not proof of every DripDM outcome, and this subcode was not present in the primary Meta error table retrieved for this review. The practical response is to preserve the failed payload type and recipient context, not label every occurrence a temporary outage.
A workflow to try
If a product-card opening reply fails while a simple inbound text reply works, compare the message formats and whether the recipient had already responded. For future comment campaigns, start with a clear text message and an inline destination URL rather than making delivery depend on a rich template. Test from an independent account that does not follow the business as well as from one that does. Those tests help reveal a format-specific difference without turning the customer into a repeated test target.
Checks before you change the setup
Do not promise that retrying the same comment with different text will recover the opportunity. One-private-reply eligibility and deduplication can limit later attempts, and the review did not verify whether a rejected rich send consumes the grant on every Meta path. If many unrelated plain-text sends fail too, investigate the connection and platform status. Keep the exact code, subcode, format, and timing for support instead of repeatedly spending requests on a guessed cause.
Compare formats without turning customers into retries
Use fresh controlled test interactions for any comparison of plain text, inline links, and supported rich formats. Record which account follows the business and whether a standard conversation was already opened by a response. Do not interpret one successful follower test as proof that every new commenter can receive the same payload. Keep the opening resource available through a clear public alternative when private delivery is unavailable. This review supports cautious investigation, not a universal claim about consumption of a rejected private-reply grant. If exact behavior matters for a launch, obtain current platform guidance and reproducible results before promising rich-format reach.
Questions
Reconnect when the account is actually disconnected. This subcode alone does not establish that reconnection or retrying will solve the failed send. Preserve message format and recipient context for investigation.
No reliable blanket diagnosis is established here. Reachlee describes a recipient-and-format pattern, while Meta documents broad code 2 failures more generally. Check the specific request and test a fresh eligible plain-text flow. Avoid endless retries or a guarantee that switching formats fixes an already-used comment.
Preserve the message type, whether it was an opening private reply or later DM, recipient context, timestamp, and exact error. Compare fresh eligible plain-text interactions rather than repeatedly retrying one rejected comment.