The Elsmar Cove Business Standards Discussion Forums More Free Files Forum Discussion Thread Post Attachments Listing Elsmar Cove Discussion Forums Main Page
Welcome to what was The Original Cayman Cove Forums!
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums

Search the Elsmar Cove!

Wooden Line
This is a "Frozen" Legacy Forum.
Most links on this page do NOT work.
Discussions since 2001 are HERE

Owl Line
  The New Elsmar Cove Forums
  Registrars and Registration
  What Company Is Your Registrar? II

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   What Company Is Your Registrar? II
Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 07 July 2000 04:51 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Continued from:
https://elsmar.com/ubb/Forum9/HTML/000006.html

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 07 July 2000 04:53 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
From: "Wannamaker-Amos, Carmen"
To: "'Marc'" Marc
Subject: What Company Is Your Registrar?
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 11:42:23 -0400

Marc,

Our Registrar is ABS QE. They were chosen by a corporate steering committee (11 plant sites were represented.) I am very satisfied with their service to our plant. Unfortunately, they have had some bad press lately.

Carmen D. Wannamaker-Amos
Quality Manager/Management Rep.
American Fibers and Yarns
Spartanburg, South Carolina

IP: Logged

Dan De Yarman
Forum Contributor

Posts: 67
From:Milwaukee, WI, U.S.A.
Registered: Aug 1999

posted 07 July 2000 11:45 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dan De Yarman   Click Here to Email Dan De Yarman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Our registrar is Perry Johnson Registrars, Inc. for QS-9000 with TE Supplement. I've had many logistic problems with them, but they seem willing to work them out.

IP: Logged

mibusha
Forum Contributor

Posts: 60
From:Royal Oak, Michigan USA
Registered: Nov 98

posted 07 July 2000 06:46 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for mibusha   Click Here to Email mibusha     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Our registrar is NSF. We have our registration audit for QS 9000 TE next week (Tuesday). Already had our "On-site Readiness Visit". Got lots of added value, especially related to Internal Audits. We'll see what next week brings. Wish me luck!

Michael

IP: Logged

Tom Goetzinger
Forum Contributor

Posts: 123
From:Milwaukee, WI USA
Registered: Mar 99

posted 10 July 2000 03:49 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Tom Goetzinger   Click Here to Email Tom Goetzinger     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
We used NSF for our QS9000-TE registration and I could not be more pleased.
Our auditors have been very experienced in real world situations and have been through, yet practical. There have been a couple of minor billing problems, but they were handled very professionally and efficiently. I couldn't be more pleased.

IP: Logged

lyman
Forum Contributor

Posts: 19
From:Salem, Oregon
Registered: May 2000

posted 11 July 2000 03:36 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for lyman   Click Here to Email lyman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
In the midst of re-evaluating our Registrar so we found the "The Second Annual ISO 9000 Registrar Customer Satisfaction Survey" in Quality Digest interesting. Here's the link:
http://www.qualitydigest.com/currentmag/html/survey.html

IP: Logged

Jim Evans
Forum Contributor

Posts: 45
From:Union City, MI, USA
Registered: Jul 2000

posted 19 July 2000 10:41 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jim Evans   Click Here to Email Jim Evans     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I came accross this site while checking the net for some information on registrars. This looked interesting so registered and this is my first posting.

First, some background information. I work for a company that ISO 9001 registered. We use KPMG and have been very happy with their professionalism and level of service. We employ about 200 people. Recently we purchased another company that makes the same product we do. They are also ISO 9001 registered using Perry Johnson Registrars (PJR). Our newly acquired company seems to be happy with PJR. We are up for renewal of our certificate in December of this year. We will be adding TE at that time. PJR has come in with an aggressive proposal that has got the serious attention of our corporate management. Here are my questions:

1- They say they can do our registration audit with 1 auditor in days by using a "Continuous Certification Method". Has anyone out there heard of such a thing?
2- I was under the impression that registrars must follow the guidelines and tables in the appendices of the QS-9000 book. Should they not be on site for at least 6 to 8 days?

To be honest I have not heard very good things said about PJR. But most of this is hearsay from meetings and seminars. Any information on the above questions would be of great help.

Jim Evans

IP: Logged

Jim Evans
Forum Contributor

Posts: 45
From:Union City, MI, USA
Registered: Jul 2000

posted 19 July 2000 10:49 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jim Evans   Click Here to Email Jim Evans     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
In reviewing my previous post I noticed an error. The PJR propsal is for 1 auditor to do the registration audit in 2 days.

Sorry for the error.

Jim

IP: Logged

Jim Biz
Forum Wizard

Posts: 275
From:ILLINOIS
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 19 July 2000 11:47 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jim Biz   Click Here to Email Jim Biz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Jim Evans:

1- They say they can do our registration audit with 1 auditor in days by using a "Continuous Certification Method". Has anyone out there heard of such a thing?

Jim Evans


We are currently under a "Continuous Registration method" for us it is more expensive but every 6 month external audit increments - allows reduction of "Days-onsite" per visit - removes the need for added site audit days for re-registration every 3 years - audit days "per year" are always based on number of employees

Your post "reads" as if PJ were proposing to change-over the registration scope-include and combine both facilities under one audit schedule.. I too have not heard "good things about them - but have no real evidence to back up anything I've read..

Hope this helps
Regards
Jim

IP: Logged

mibusha
Forum Contributor

Posts: 60
From:Royal Oak, Michigan USA
Registered: Nov 98

posted 20 July 2000 07:39 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for mibusha   Click Here to Email mibusha     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I dealt with PJ a year and a half ago. Be sure they know you want certification, not compliance. They have trouble understanding the difference. And be sure you get a qualified TE auditor. Twice they sent ISO 9000 qualified auditors to do a QS 9000 TE audit.

Michael

IP: Logged

Jim Evans
Forum Contributor

Posts: 45
From:Union City, MI, USA
Registered: Jul 2000

posted 20 July 2000 08:06 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jim Evans   Click Here to Email Jim Evans     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Thanks for the help. I should also mention the PJR proposal calls for surveillence audits of 1 day every six months. And yes the idea is to combine the two companies into a single audit scheme however we will maintain 2 separate and distinct quality systems. It was my understanding that different quality management systems even in the same facility are required to be audited separately with each having it's own certificate.

Jim Evans

IP: Logged

Jim Evans
Forum Contributor

Posts: 45
From:Union City, MI, USA
Registered: Jul 2000

posted 20 July 2000 08:30 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jim Evans   Click Here to Email Jim Evans     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
An addendum to my previous post. Our present auditor is calling for 6 days for registration audit and 5 surveillence audits every 6 months of 1 day each. The PJR proposal has the same surveillence scheme but only 2 days for the registration audit. I am concerned about the large discrepency in the registration days. Could this be a problem for me down the road?

Regards,

Jim

IP: Logged

Sam
Forum Contributor

Posts: 244
From:
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 20 July 2000 09:25 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Sam   Click Here to Email Sam     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Jim, We presently use PJR and I will share our experience with you.

1- PJR uses the same auditors that most other registrars use.
2- High staff turnover rate in there scheduling department.
3- Poor scheduling performance,i.e. scheduled auditor from cal. to do audit in the southwest; resulted in $1400 airfare.
Two auditors arrive at the airport at the same time,diff. flights, and each one rents a car, again resulting in added cost
4- The main office/auditor WILL NOT return phone calls. All telephone contact must be handled through your account rep.
5- One "glitch" that came up during our registration audit; the auditor failed to document the review of our manual,we were told that this would not be a problem, however, when the audit results went up for review we were rejected. We were required to re-submit our manual for review which resulted in a three week delay of receiving our certificate.

I have not heard of the continuous audit program nor have I been able to find it in the QSM, however, as in in any contract get everything in writing.
I would further suggest an on-site meeting with the registrar you select prior to any contractural agreements.

IP: Logged

Tom Goetzinger
Forum Contributor

Posts: 123
From:Milwaukee, WI USA
Registered: Mar 99

posted 20 July 2000 04:49 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Tom Goetzinger   Click Here to Email Tom Goetzinger     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
According to Schedule H of QS9000-TE, a company with 200 employees is required to have 8 on-site auditor days for the initial registration and 2 auditor days every 6 months for surveilance. This is not determined by the registrar, but by the standard. I have been told that it is likely I will need to have 4 auditor days for a 10 person company going to QS9000 and QS9000-TE at the same time; 2 auditor days for each standard, even though the requirements overlap considerably. While that may not be logical, I have been told that the RAB has been very stringent about that. Beware of anyone who says they can register your company in less days than the standard requires; there is something they are not telling you. Have them show you (in writing) how they propose to do it, and make sure that it has been approved by the RAB.

IP: Logged

Wallybaloo
Forum Contributor

Posts: 16
From:Oregon
Registered: Apr 2000

posted 27 July 2000 01:21 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Wallybaloo   Click Here to Email Wallybaloo     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Anybody seen the latest Registrar Survey in Quality Digest? My experiences with BSI, Lloyds and UL suggest that the survey is pretty good.

IP: Logged

Roger Eastin
Forum Wizard

Posts: 345
From:Greenville, SC
Registered:

posted 27 July 2000 03:18 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Roger Eastin   Click Here to Email Roger Eastin     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I haven't heard too many people comment about Lloyds. Are they a good registrar? I know UL and I have heard some good things about BSI.

IP: Logged

Jim Evans
Forum Contributor

Posts: 45
From:Union City, MI, USA
Registered: Jul 2000

posted 27 July 2000 03:34 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jim Evans   Click Here to Email Jim Evans     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Wallybalo,

What issue of QD are you refering to?

IP: Logged

Jim Biz
Forum Wizard

Posts: 275
From:ILLINOIS
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 27 July 2000 03:56 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jim Biz   Click Here to Email Jim Biz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I had a copy e-mailed to me - but it is also net posted curently for the July Issue.

Looks as though it is better information than last years.... appears more comprehensive anyway.

Regards
Jim

IP: Logged

isodude
Lurker (<10 Posts)

Posts: 6
From:Los Angeles, California
Registered: Jul 2000

posted 31 July 2000 12:31 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for isodude   Click Here to Email isodude     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM ANYONE WHO HAS USED SGS AS THEIR REGISTRAR. THEY CLAIM TO BE THE "LARGEST REGISTRAR IN THE WORLD". PLEASE PROVIDE DETAILS OF YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH THEM. THANKS FOR SHARING.

IP: Logged

lyman
Forum Contributor

Posts: 19
From:Salem, Oregon
Registered: May 2000

posted 31 July 2000 01:21 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for lyman   Click Here to Email lyman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Roger: Motorola Semiconductor used Lloyd's when they registered in '98 and it was a really good experience for us (all departments were required to register as a group - if one failed we all failed)- we all passed. (Of course we also had Marc as one of our consultant's so the outcome was preordained!!) The auditor's were tough but willing to work with us when we felt there were discrepancies on how we/they were interpreting standards. Additionally, they were very careful not to consult but provided some guidance on how we might make our system comply and improve with standard requirements. All in all it was a thorough assessment audit and surveillances were getting tougher as they expected our system to be continuously improving (fair enough!)

Jim the Quality Digest link is: www.qualitydigest.com/currentmag/html/survey.html

IP: Logged

Dan De Yarman
Forum Contributor

Posts: 67
From:Milwaukee, WI, U.S.A.
Registered: Aug 1999

posted 01 August 2000 12:01 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dan De Yarman   Click Here to Email Dan De Yarman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Perry Johnson Registrars, Inc. is our registrar, as I've mentioned before. The registrar is acceptable at best. The auditors, however, were fantastic. They were able to apply the standard very effectively to our real world situations.

I don't know how to complement them better than this: Our registration was a real value-added experience. The feedback we received from our auditors is going to significantly improve our quality system in the near future. What else is an audit suppose to do?

Dan

IP: Logged

Jim Evans
Forum Contributor

Posts: 45
From:Union City, MI, USA
Registered: Jul 2000

posted 18 August 2000 09:01 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jim Evans   Click Here to Email Jim Evans     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
We elected to stay with KPMG for another hitch. I for one am glad. I understand the financial people's concern about trying to find lower price providers of services. However I am the one that deals directly with the auditors and I feel that I have a very good idea of what to expect in how those auditors interpret the standard. I was able to make my case by explaining how price is not necessarily the same as value. It didn't hurt either that after my questioning PJR's reduced audit schedule they revised their bid and it was actually higher than KPMG. Now it is on with my preparations for TE due to be audited in December. Thanks to everyone for their opininons and help.

Best Regards,

Jim

IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply Hop to:

Contact Us | The Elsmar Cove Home Page

Your Input Into These Forums Is Appreciated! Thanks!


Main Site Search
Y'All Come Back Now, Ya Hear?
Powered by FreeBSD!Made With A Mac!Powered by Apache!