I have a customer who wants to reject an order because they say it is not to print, we have run this job since 1997 using the same print. They never had a print of their own all they had was the SIR we sent to them after running samples. Now they have come up with a print of thier own but did not let us know, would you except this rejection knowing that it was correct by the print you had used for years?

I have a customer who wants to reject an order because they say it is not to print, we have run this job since 1997 using the same print. They never had a print of their own all they had was the SIR we sent to them after running samples. Now they have come up with a print of thier own but did not let us know, would you except this rejection knowing that it was correct by the print you had used for years?I'm not familiar with "SIR", but what does the contract or PO state?

Does the customer order to their part number or to your print drawing number?
Compare the POs before and after the customer made their own print. Did the verbage change? e.g. revision, part number etc...
Is the order a long term contract?
Does the customers new print have the same drawing/part number and revision as your internal print?

If by reading the PO or contract there is no way to determine that their requirements have changed, I would not accept their rejection at all. However, can the parts be reworked to meet the customers print? I'm assuming that something changed with the part requirements on the customers print vs yours, otherwise there would be no rejection.

If when reviewing the PO or contract, a discrepancy is found, I would look at your internal process for customer order review.

I'm not familiar with "SIR"... Sample Inspection Report, I think.

Going by the facts as given, I would not accept the rejection. However, if the PO referenced a suffix bump or PN change etc. there is not much you can do. If this is an automotive part what happened at PPAP?

Now they have come up with a print of thier own but did not let us know, would you except this rejection knowing that it was correct by the print you had used for years?If you're dead certain they didn't let you know? Not a chance. If that is the case they obviously got what they ordered.

M Caruso said it well: If by reading the PO or contract there is no way to determine that their requirements have changed, I would not accept their rejection at all. However, can the parts be reworked to meet the customers print? I'm assuming that something changed with the part requirements on the customers print vs yours, otherwise there would be no rejection.

If when reviewing the PO or contract, a discrepancy is found, I would look at your internal process for customer order review.One further point of interest: Why did they suddenly come up with a drawing after being satisfied (or were they not?) for years? The reason is important. Scenarios:

The requirements did not change. Perhaps they decided to clean their act up and someone make a drawing from a part, without any real changes to the thing?
The requirements did change. Why?
What was changed btw?

/Claes

Some very valid points have been mentioned considering contracts and specs and communication...but at the end of the day, do you want to keep this Customer?

As horrible as it sounds, and without knowing the extent (i.e., cost) of the rejection, your company may need to swallow their pride and simply accept the complaint. It's not only a cost of doing businees but it's a cost of keeping business.

However, if there is nothing in your contract at this point regarding drawings, prints, etc., you may wish to revise the contract to avoid this uncomfortable situation in the future. :)

Best of luck....

:lol: I got a call from my customer, staying that she was not going to reject order after all, come to find out she has a new inspector who was using the new print they come up with but failed to fax over anything to us. She did also say that after all those years they had been going by the print we sent over, needless to say she was alot calmer than before. I still would not have excepted the rejection. :lol:

Thank's for the update, georgianna. come to find out she has a new inspector who was using the new print Ah-ha... So there we have it. This is not uncommon when a new inspector enters the scene. They tend to inspect things :rolleyes: and compare them with specifications, no less :lol:. In doing so they often dig one or two "whoopsies" out of the woodwork. the new print they come up with but failed to fax over anything to us.That is worse, but if this is not a common occurence I wouldn't lose sleep over it. Something tells me that one or two red faces may be seen over at your customers place, and they'll probably sort it out in a hurry.

/Claes

I tend to agree with Claes that you don't need to beat your customer over the head with this SNAFU, BUT you do need to formalize your own Contract Review to give you the ammunition to fight something similar from this or another customer in the future.

Think of the Contract Review as a FMEA (Failure Mode and Evaluation Analysis) for the business relationship in addition to a FMEA for the product's manufacture.

Certainly, one of the prime points in YOUR Contract Review FMEA will be HOW products are inspected and approved (at supplier AND customer), including what print (and version) will be used as well as what instruments will be used.

A second part will be the "negotiation and acceptance" by all parties when any product becomes "suspect" as nonconforming.

(Note - as your recent situation shows, one party was holding the second party accountable for "conforming to a secret tolerance." You might want to create a "Material Review Board" which has the power to use all resources necessary to ascertain whether suspect parts are really nonconforming, and then to deal with whatever measures are necessary to deliver conforming parts [rework or make new or pay penalty and walk away.])

On a lighter note: similar situations of left hand not knowing what right hand was doing and the resultant uproar were among the primary reasons folks initially sought to create a Standard for a Quality Management System. The writers of ISO 13485 even use the term "harmonize" to describe the goal of uniform requirements among the regulatory bodies of various governments.

Wow, a lot of questions here?
1st the customer has a print other than the one you sent. If you built the part to this print, would it work better for the customer. Is this an opportunity to gain market share? and in the end, isn't the customer required to provide you, the supplier with the print?
2nd Is the customer print a document they use on the floor for their assembly method? Will this cause problems on their assembly floor?
3rd. Is it possible to build to this print, and save money in doing so? Will this new design be more robust to the customer? Is your process capable of meeting this print?
4th. I'm courious why you did not call the customer and say "we have a problem" and state the facts to find out the cause and determine a course of action?

Dispite the fact that the customer later called and said, "sorry - new inspecter", what opportunities do you have to make this better for the customer and save you money as well?
What does the customer really want?

Good points. Welcome to the Cove, Arthur!:bigwave:
Definitely, the best is "Call and ask!"
I gave you some Karma for this - check your "User CP" in the navigation bar just above this thread.
We're looking forward to a lot more help from you!