> Our organisation is a supply division within a larger group.
>
> Our parent company has orders placed on it. It does not have the resources
> to build the all of the final product in-house so free-issues us with an
> agreed proportion (via a production schedule) of the material required to
> build the final product. Our company does not place an order with our
> parent company to get this material, it is given to us. My company then
> builds the final product using the material and sends it directly to the
> customer of our parent company.
>
> Now, can I then define our parent company as a customer as per 4.7 ISO 9002?
> I cannot define them as a supplier because if they repeatedly sent us poor
> quality material (as they sometimes do) I could then justifiably have reason
> to prevent any material coming into our company from them. This would them
> mean my company closes.
>
> Does defining them as an "internal" customer make sense? Can the list
> members advise?

- - - -
Your parent company - in the case you describe - is not your supplier since you have no control over them. (I find intriguing your use of the words "repeatedly" and "sometimes" in the same context when referring to bad material you receive from your parent.) Certainly you could prevent poor material coming in to you from them, but I doubt you would be around long enough to do it a second time.

Neither are they a customer since you have (I suspect) no freedom to decline their "business". The end customer isn't your customer either since you describe them as the parent company's customer. You are just the middle man.

What to do?

Forget labels (and the applicable ISO clauses) and do what makes the most sense.

Inspect material coming from your parent. If it is deficient, in any way, report it back to them, describing the condition and its useability, and request further instructions. If you have something like a MDR (Material Deficiency Report), use it. Let them decide whether or not you are to use the material. Then describe this whole process in a documented procedure.

Does this sound like a reasonable approach? Does it sound like it meets the spirit and intent of the standard, even though you might not be too certain which "letter" it applies to? Do you realize that your procedures do not need to cite which ISO requirement they spring from?

BTW, one of my clients is in this situation and handles it as I described. They have been registered for years. In their case, once the parent got registered they began sending them Corrective Action Notices - they ducked after sending the first few, but, to their relief, they were well received.