Customer Property Identification Requirement - ISO 9001 Clause 7.5.4

[Big Jim]

Requirements in the standard that are applicable to individual customers, (such as the one that's the subject of this thread) may be waived by individual customers. The waiver should be in writing, and specific as to the scope of the waiver.

Can you elaborate on this?

 

[Jim Wynne]

Can you elaborate on this?

TO give an example from the clause under discussion (7.5.4), there's this bit: "If any customer property is lost, damaged, or otherwise found to be unsuitable for use, this shall be reported to the customer and records maintained." Putting aside the grammatical train wreck of that sentence, a customer may waive the reporting requirement, but perhaps not the record-keeping part of it.

 

[Richard Pike]

TO give an example from the clause under discussion (7.5.4), there's this bit: "If any customer property is lost, damaged, or otherwise found to be unsuitable for use, this shall be reported to the customer and records maintained." Putting aside the grammatical train wreck of that sentence, a customer may waive the reporting requirement, but perhaps not the record-keeping part of it.

If any Customer Property is lost etc, this will have consequences to the production process and the Customer would have to be informed of the situation (i.e the property cannot simply be replaced). This is a typical example of the fact that no requirement of any standard can be viewed in isolation!

 

[Big Jim]

TO give an example from the clause under discussion (7.5.4), there's this bit: "If any customer property is lost, damaged, or otherwise found to be unsuitable for use, this shall be reported to the customer and records maintained." Putting aside the grammatical train wreck of that sentence, a customer may waive the reporting requirement, but perhaps not the record-keeping part of it.

I still don't see a justification for a waver. Is there an element of the standard you can point out that allows a waver? It certainly isn't 1.2.

 

[Richard Pike]

TO give an example from the clause under discussion (7.5.4), there's this bit: "If any customer property is lost, damaged, or otherwise found to be unsuitable for use, this shall be reported to the customer and records maintained." Putting aside the grammatical train wreck of that sentence, a customer may waive the reporting requirement, but perhaps not the record-keeping part of it.

I still don't see a justification for a waver. Is there an element of the standard you can point out that allows a waver? It certainly isn't 1.2.

Of course an organization must notify its Customer if it damages (or otherwise) their property. If they don't, the will infringe numerous other QMS requirements as well as customer trust, not to mention production integrity because they are now not using the equipment that was agreed. The method that is used to do this must be recorded, even if only by filing a copy of an email. This is surely just normal business practice, regardless of whatever QMS is in place.

 

[Marc]

I still don't see a justification for a waver. Is there an element of the standard you can point out that allows a waver? It certainly isn't 1.2.

I think as Jim has pointed out, this would be for a specific customer and would not apply to any other customer. A specific customer may not see a need for any accounting, for what ever reason. Because of this, we can not, from what we know in this thread at this point, know why a customer would waive tracking / accounting for their property, so it's really not relevant. If a customer waives that requirement, it is their prerogative. It may be unusual, bit apparently is does happen.

This does not relieve the company from complying with the standard for any customer who has not waived the requirement.

As to an element of the standard that allows a waver, there isn't anything in the standard which says a customer can *not* waiver the requirement.

 

[Richard Pike]

I still don't see a justification for a waver. Is there an element of the standard you can point out that allows a waver? It certainly isn't 1.2.

I think as Jim has pointed out, this would be for a specific customer and would not apply to any other customer. A specific customer may not see a need for any accounting, for what ever reason. Because of this, we can not, from what we know in this thread at this point, know why a customer would waive tracking / accounting for their property, so it's really not relevant. If a customer waives that requirement, it is their prerogative. It may be unusual, bit apparently is does happen.

This does not relieve the company from complying with the standard for any customer who has not waived the requirement.

As to an element of the standard that allows a waver, there isn't anything in the standard which says a customer can *not* waiver the requirement.

Baffled- So if i have a single dedicated customer and that customer waives ALL requirements ? It seems that we are only going to get "opinion" here and as most Auditors opinion are of course wrong.. My "opinion" for what it is worth is that normal business sense will apply, that all organizations will comply - to the degree necessary - to meet the requirements. Of course business sense must be coupled with auditor sense. I appreciate everybodys input though - thanks.

 

[Jim Wynne]

If any Customer Property is lost etc, this will have consequences to the production process and the Customer would have to be informed of the situation (i.e the property cannot simply be replaced). This is a typical example of the fact that no requirement of any standard can be viewed in isolation!

Let's say that our business is taking something received from the customer and somehow "adding value" to it. The things we receive belong to the customer, but thousands of them are received weekly, and our process is such that some small percentage of them are scrapped. The customer is aware of the fallout and has no problem with it. We tell the customer that the standard requires us to report loss of their property, and they tell us that they don't want to be bothered with it. Does the standard require us to annoy the customer? No.

 

[howste]

I still don't see a justification for a waver. Is there an element of the standard you can point out that allows a waver? It certainly isn't 1.2.

ISO 9001 doesn't specifically mention waivers, but here's what 1.2 does say:

Where exclusions are made, claims of conformity to this International Standard are not acceptable unless these exclusions are limited to requirements within Clause 7, and such exclusions do not affect the organization's ability, or responsibility, to provide product that meets customer and applicable statutory and regulatory requirements.

1) 7.5.4 is within clause 7.
2) In the case mentioned by Jim, waiving the reporting requirement (by the customer) doesn't affect the organization's ability to provide product meeting requirements.

It looks like it's allowed to me.

 

[Marc]

<snip> So if i have a single dedicated customer and that customer waives ALL requirements <snip>

Requirements that apply to specifically to them, yes. Many requirements of the standard are not customer specific so to answer your question - No. A customer can not waive all the requirements of the standard.

Let's say you are a company with one customer. That customer does not supply any 'customer supplied materials' or other things such as returnable packaging. Since you have no 'customer supplied materials' it becomes a 'not applicable' requirement. However, the company must address the requirement in some way if only to specifically state in their documentation that there are currently no customers which supply 'customer equipment or supplies or product', but should the situation arise where a customer does supply 'customer equipment or supplies or product' a system to track and manage the 'customer property' will be established and implemented.

The point here is if you have no customers which supply materials or other 'property', how can you set up a system, and provide evidence that the system works?