As a Registration auditor I wouldn't write this as a nonconformity in a million years.
I'm not saying there isn't some problem here - but it strikes me that the evidence for such a claim against ISO 9001 is problematic, at best.
What would be the benefit of such an accusation?
I'm not saying there isn't some problem here - but it strikes me that the evidence for such a claim against ISO 9001 is problematic, at best.
What would be the benefit of such an accusation?
Surely a professional auditor owes the client/auditee a duty of care?
The potential/actual nonconformity is loss of system integrity (5.4.2b).
This is not an "accusation", it is a straightforward evaluation of the facts leading a to a conclusion about the system.
We owe the auditee/client that much at least.
John