Good day,

I am quite a newbie and this is my first post. Just need some guidance and help from experts...I hope you can give your insights, I would really appreciate it.

When implementing QMS, we opted to hire consultant with contract inclusive of performing pre-assessment audit on our system. During the audit, when the auditor glanced through our CARs, he made a casual remark that those CARs (the report itself) arising from customer complaint must also cite the applicable clause of the ISO 9001 standard that it has deviated from plus the category of NC. I am just confuse because we only practice that (citing applicable clause and minor/major NC) if the issue written on the CAR report arises from an internal or external audit. In case of customer complaint, we just put there customer complaint received from so-and-so on date.

I understand it is not in the standard, but in the usual practice (especially to our seasoned auditors here in the Cove) is it really required/necessary for us to do so?

I hope you can help us with this one, our certification audit is scheduled next month and maybe our auditor by then also has the same view...:confused:

:thanx: and happy new year!

lyne

Good day,

I am quite a newbie and this is my first post. Just need some guidance and help from experts...I hope you can give your insights, I would really appreciate it.

When implementing QMS, we opted to hire consultant with contract inclusive of performing pre-assessment audit on our system. During the audit, when the auditor glanced through our CARs, he made a casual remark that those CARs (the report itself) arising from customer complaint must also cite the applicable clause of the ISO 9001 standard that it has deviated from plus the category of NC. I am just confuse because we only practice that (citing applicable clause and minor/major NC) if the issue written on the CAR report arises from an internal or external audit. In case of customer complaint, we just put there customer complaint received from so-and-so on date.

I understand it is not in the standard, but in the usual practice (especially to our seasoned auditors here in the Cove) is it really required/necessary for us to do so?

I hope you can help us with this one, our certification audit is scheduled next month and maybe our auditor by then also has the same view...:confused:

:thanx: and happy new year!

lyne

There is no requirement to cite a specific clause in a CAR unless you have written that requirement into your complaint procedure. It could also be possible you are required by a customer to include it.

Is your consultant saying your customers are not allowed to complain unless they cite a specific requirement? Even if he/she is saying you have to identify it for the customer, what if the customer complains about something that isn't covered in the standard?

Whenever you are audited to a standard, the auditor should be able to show you the requirement in the standard. Ask him/her to show you the requirement.

Dave

Thank you very much Sir Dave...it is a very helpful input to us.

:thanks::thanks::thanks::thanks::thanks::thanks:

Lyne

While on the subject, I would like forum members to comment on the follwing too:
Some time back, I had a discussion with one of the senior auditors with a prominent CB about the most appropriate ISO 9001 clause relevant to redressal of customer complaint (assume that complaint is about some product feature covered in the client documentation). The issue arose because in client's QM, procedure for customer complaint redressal (agreed that it is not a mandatory procedure), had been referred to under clause 7.2.3/8.5.2(customer communication/corrective action) of QM. I expressed the view that,if at all, it is more appropriate to refer this procedure under clause 8.3(control of nonconforming products), as a customer complaint arises out of a 'post-delivery nonconformance'. My friend was of the view that post-delivery nonconformance envisaged in clause 8.3 does not include customer complaints. What do you say?

Your consultant is way off in his comments. Filling out paperwork, any paperwork, with references to any ISO requirement is just plain ridiculous! Is he also suggesting that training forms have '6.2.2' on them, or calibration forms have 7.6 on them? So why (only) cusomer complaints.

BTW, was this consultant contracted to help implement, then do the audit? Is it the same person who helped with implementation and then doing the audit? If it is, what did they tell you to implement? Are they now 'imagining' new audit requirements?

IMHO - Time for a new consultant!!

While on the subject, I would like forum members to comment on the follwing too:
Some time back, I had a discussion with one of the senior auditors with a prominent CB about the most appropriate ISO 9001 clause relevant to redressal of customer complaint (assume that complaint is about some product feature covered in the client documentation). The issue arose because in client's QM, procedure for customer complaint redressal (agreed that it is not a mandatory procedure), had been referred to under clause 7.2.3/8.5.2(customer communication/corrective action) of QM. I expressed the view that,if at all, it is more appropriate to refer this procedure under clause 8.3(control of nonconforming products), as a customer complaint arises out of a 'post-delivery nonconformance'. My friend was of the view that post-delivery nonconformance envisaged in clause 8.3 does not include customer complaints. What do you say?

I'll go ahead and bite! It doesn't matter! What matters is what's effective for the customer and the company!

I'll go ahead and bite! It doesn't matter! What matters is what's effective for the customer and the company!
I guess my postin was not clear enough. The essense of the issue I posed was whether term 'post-delivery nonconformance' in clause 8.3 of ISO 9001 cover 'customer complaint' (though alleged nonconformance). Pl react.
I totally agree that everything that we do,should be good for the company and customers; also suppliers. That is certainly the purpose of ISO 9001 and the various elements in the standard; the standard is supposed to facilitate translating this purpose in a structured and uniform manner.

Your consultant is way off in his comments. Filling out paperwork, any paperwork, with references to any ISO requirement is just plain ridiculous! Is he also suggesting that training forms have '6.2.2' on them, or calibration forms have 7.6 on them? So why (only) cusomer complaints.

BTW, was this consultant contracted to help implement, then do the audit? Is it the same person who helped with implementation and then doing the audit? If it is, what did they tell you to implement? Are they now 'imagining' new audit requirements?

IMHO - Time for a new consultant!!

Our consultant tapped other auditor to do the pre-assessment audit for us. The latter made that comment, which I also thought is not really necessary. And it is not also stated in our complaint procedure. In our CPAR form, it only requires the reference document which is the ISO9001standard if CPAR is an answer to an issue raised during an audit, and email or any other attachment for other matters such as customer complaint.

Our consultant tapped other auditor to do the pre-assessment audit for us. The latter made that comment, which I also thought is not really necessary. And it is not also stated in our complaint procedure. In our CPAR form, it only requires the reference document which is the ISO9001standard if CPAR is an answer to an issue raised during an audit, and email or any other attachment for other matters such as customer complaint.

Thanks for the clarification. I'd suggest removing any reference to the ISO standard in any CPAR or similar - it's not value added and can cause confusion.