Maybe the way you put down a statement, has probably caused a little mix up.
'In this case, I still bet on Clause 7.4.1...." - does this mean that you think its (the criteria document) part of Clause 7.4.1? which IT IS! OR Does it mean that you are not complying with 7.4.1? Because if you are following what the criteria says (which is what the unit is following), then you are conforming to Clause 7.4.1. And I don't see why you will bet on 7.4.1.
For document ambiguity, it could be Clause 4.2.3 a, b or c. But then again, I wouldn't throw in an NC; only an observation.
So, the question is what exactly do you mean by 'I still bet on...."??
Oh, another thing, my name is not 'Ciao', it is Sameer or SAM. 'Ciao' is a silly term I use for 'bye'.
Ciao.
Hi Sameer:
I am sorry to put your name wrongly because I am from China and English is not my mother tongue. sometimes got me confused with names. SORRY!
Regarding to the topic, the first thing coming to my mind is 4.2.3, but after discussed with Chinese auditors, I changed my mind.
First of all, we should make clear what is audit criteria.
The sequence of the audit criteria should be the Standard, Quality policy, quality mannual, procedures, and then WI.
If you look at the procedure, OK, it complies with the Standard.
If you look at the criteria, OK, it complies too.
But the fact (objective evidence) is that what they have done does not comply with the requirement of the procedure which complies with the Standard.
Ciao.