4 replies to this topic

[msh3egy]

Dear Friends

if a lead auditor for ISO 22000 make the audit for food factory

and he was not qualified so there are some problem he didn't understand it


and after period of time , a problem in the factory happend and this problem is related to food safety and cause in hazard

in this case could the auditor be claimed from any authority and will be taken as a resposnible for this hazard

and he was not qualified enought so there are some problem he didn't understand and not mention it in his report for audit , but upon his report the certificatiob body give the factory the certificate of ISO 22000


thanks

[Erasmo]

Dear Friends

if a lead auditor for ISO 22000 make the audit for food factory

and he was not qualified so there are some problem he didn't understand it


and after period of time , a problem in the factory happend and this problem is related to food safety and cause in hazard

in this case could the auditor be claimed from any authority and will be taken as a resposnible for this hazard


thanks

The answer is NO.
It happen to me 2 years ago. When one of the technicians of an audited plant use unnapropiate lubricant in one equipent (they have the correct one in the spare parts warehouse). The product was contaminated and returned. The auditor is only an assessor, no a supervisor.

[msh3egy]

even the auditor see that

1- the infra structure is not in good case

2- there is a sewer inside the factry


and write in his report that infrastructre is in good way , and didn't mention that there is a sewer inside the factory

[Charles.C]

Dear msh3egy,

Unfortunately we all make mistakes sometimes, even auditors. Nonetheless, I agree with you that they must be responsible at some level for their official report. IMEX, there is typically some kind of disclaimer in inspection repors to protect for this issue but this does not guarantee immunity from attack for "lack of due diligence".

Sometimes the flaws are not always visible at the time of audit of course.

I expect that there is a formal course of making a complaint if you believe it to be justified.

Rgds / Charles.C

Added – as a comparison to yr own comments, you might find the attached item interesting. This appears to be a copy of an official audit report (not iso 22000) of a food factory producing raw finished products. Considering the various nonconformances mentioned, the final assessment is perhaps rather surprising.?

 audit_report_food_safety_.pdf   146.02KB   134 downloads

[Simon]

An audit is only a snapshot and can only review what is happening on the day and at the time of the audit.

If the company deliberately hides things from the auditor on the day or does things differently at times outside of the audit then how can the auditor be expected to know. These willful acts and omissions are negligence on the part of the company.

Also the auditor is human and can miss things or makes mistakes of judgment on the day. These are genuine mistakes made by the auditor and can happen to anyone.

On the other hand an auditor can willfully choose to ignore hazards for various reasons. These willful omissions are negligence on the part of the auditor.

The auditor may not recognize hazards or their significance because of a lack of competence such as relevant educational qualifications, audit, technical or industry specific experience. It is the responsibility of the Certification Body to ensure the competence of auditors undertaking work on their behalf. These willful omissions could be negligence on the part of the Certification Body. Or it could be that the Auditor willfully duped the Certification Body or a bit of both.

So there are various reasons why an audit could be flawed which ends up with a company who are not wholly fit to supply safe food products achieving certification to a food safety standard.

The Accreditation and Certification process is meant to minimize this, but it will still happen.

If a company supplied food products that resulted in illness, injury or worse death there would be an enquiry and thorough investigation by the relevant enforcing body such as the local government environmental health office.

Ultimately the company would be held responsible and they would face any civil or criminal prosecution; as well the business loss due to negative media coverage.

However if during the investigation the Auditor or the Certification Body were implicated as being negligent then this could result in the Accreditation Body taking action against them.

The name of the Food Safety Standard e.g. ISO 22000 and all Certificates issued to other companies (good, bad and ugly) may be tainted by the negative media reports. The credibility of food safety standards and the certification process is vital or we will return swiftly to the bad old days where everyone audited their suppliers to their own standards.

Every link in the chain must play its part by following the clear rules laid down within the Accreditation and Certification Process. If everyone does that to the best of their ability cases of the above should be avoided or at least minimized to the lowest possible level.

Does this help you to think about your own situation and what you need to do?

Regards,
Simon