Nit Picking Auditors

Yes. I once had a BRC auditor (genuinely) raise a non conformance because our crisis team list was held in a separate (but linked) document from the crisis procedure. The two documents were held together in a file for use in a crisis but the reason for it was due to the fact it was a start up so there were staff changes as people left once launch was bedded in and the normal maintenance team took over. It avoided me having to reissue the procedure each time.

I notice now version 6 specifically permits this. When you only have two minors raised though, I think you just suck it up.

Anyone had the "paperwork too clean" non-conformance?

Anyone had the "paperwork too clean" non-conformance?

No but basically they're saying "we think you've faked this paperwork" if that's what they have said. It's quite a damning thing to say and I would, if it was raised for me, and I was certain that it hadn't been faked (sometimes junior members of staff do very odd things with the best of intentions), I'd challenge the reasoning. Sometimes it's the person doing the paperwork who keeps it clean, if you can show multiple examples of this, it should keep you out of that non con. Also by pressing it, most auditors I would hope would not push this too far. Even when you are sure, certain that you are seeing something faked, you never end up raising it as a non con unless you have some evidence. If I was in that situation of having that gut feel bullsh*t detector going off, I would take the technical manager aside and say something along the lines of "I'm not going to raise this but I'm concerned that some of this paperwork was not completed at the time, perhaps it was written out again later to keep it neat but I prefer to see the records from the time".

There's a way IYSWIM.