11 replies to this topic

[SUSHIL]

Farmers Tied to Listeria Outbreak Sue Food-Safety Auditor

Two Colorado farmers whose cantaloupes were tainted with listeria have filed a lawsuit blaming a food-safety auditor that didn't pick up safety problems and gave the farm a "superior" rating just a month before the nation's deadliest case of foodborne illness in a quarter century.

 

read more at-

http://www.agweb.com...sociated_Press/

[RuiM]

SUSHIL,

 

Thank you for share. Interesting indeed... Unfortunatly the consequences were severe!

 

Rgds.

[George @ Safefood 360°]

Very interested development. I’m not aware of any similar legal actions in any part of the world but it is not surprising the growth in 3^rd party certification in the US has produced this. It will be very interesting to see how a US Court sees it. The CB’s will be losing more than a little sleep over this, I suspect. It may have some important considerations for other food safety services provides in the US. 

 

​One to watch closely.

 

George 

[Charles.C]

Dear George,

 

Some similarities, barring the 3rd party aspect, to the US peanut butter saga perhaps ?

 

Rgds / Charles

[GMO]

Wow!  That's scary.  I suppose though for an audit to be true verification if there was something obvious they should have seen then, well, maybe BUT presumably the producer knew the standard they were being audited against.  An audit is only ever a snap shot.  Compliance starts with the food business operator and, I would say, remains their responsibility.  Expecting an auditor to get to the bottom of every issue in a day or so is very unlikely.  Unless the auditor had been blatently incompitent, I would argue this is surely baseless?  BUT there will be a huge tightening up of auditor practice and probable resulting lack of pragmatism (again!)  Just as things were starting to calm down... 

[Setanta]

How long before we (as auditees) have to sign paperwork that we will not hold the audtiting body responsible for anything they miss?

[GMO]

How long before we (as auditees) have to sign paperwork that we will not hold the audtiting body responsible for anything they miss?

 

A matter of weeks I suspect.

[cazyncymru]

I agree with you GMO, an audit is a snap shot of what a plant is doing at any given time.

 

If we're holding auditors accountable, then where are the prosecutions of the TESCO PIU auditors in light of horsegate?

 

An auditor should not be held accountable for the shortcomings of a company; it's for the company to show due diligence, not the auditor.

 

Caz x

[Pizza&Sandwich]

Wow!  That's scary.  I suppose though for an audit to be true verification if there was something obvious they should have seen then, well, maybe BUT presumably the producer knew the standard they were being audited against.  An audit is only ever a snap shot.  Compliance starts with the food business operator and, I would say, remains their responsibility.  Expecting an auditor to get to the bottom of every issue in a day or so is very unlikely.  Unless the auditor had been blatently incompitent, I would argue this is surely baseless?  BUT there will be a huge tightening up of auditor practice and probable resulting lack of pragmatism (again!)  Just as things were starting to calm down... 

 

Sometimes the auditor doesn't get to look at the whole picture either because the company is in control of what information they share or choose not to share...

As I understand several of the articles on this, they were using plain old city water to 'wash' the fruit. I cannot image that this was the intended use by the manufacturer of the equipment in question...

[Simon]

At best an audit takes a decent snapshot of the systems owned by the business. Even a thorough audit barely scratches the surface and simply cannot go into detail in all areas. e.g. look at every specification of every ingredient used in every product, every training record and every aspect of every process etc.  It is looking at general systems that meet specified requirements, are they in place and do they appear to be effective.  The company has a duty to understand deeply all hazards pertaining to its business and ensure adequate control measures are in place.  That knowledge and application of knowledge is solely the businesses responsibility. 

[teaks]

"During an inspection of the Chamberlain Farms packinghouse from August 14  t0 31 of last year, FDA found a number of conditions that could have contributed to the spread of contamination. According to the report, the food contact and non-food contact surfaces in the packhouse were constructed with materials that couldn’t be easily cleaned or sanitized, including carpet and wood. The FDA also said that records were not available to demonstrate whether the farm had monitored its water for washing the melons had the proper pH for disinfecting and preventing cross-contamination."

 

This is from an article I read -- surely an auditor would call this out. And it doesn't seem like this is a "snapshot" scenario. We all want good audit scores, but at the end of the day, it doesn't mean much if people get sick. We pay our auditors to audit us against a standard.  If they overlook - or don't report -items as obvious as improper food contact surfaces, they are complicit.  

[Simon]

"During an inspection of the Chamberlain Farms packinghouse from August 14  t0 31 of last year, FDA found a number of conditions that could have contributed to the spread of contamination. According to the report, the food contact and non-food contact surfaces in the packhouse were constructed with materials that couldn’t be easily cleaned or sanitized, including carpet and wood. The FDA also said that records were not available to demonstrate whether the farm had monitored its water for washing the melons had the proper pH for disinfecting and preventing cross-contamination."

 

This is from an article I read -- surely an auditor would call this out. And it doesn't seem like this is a "snapshot" scenario. We all want good audit scores, but at the end of the day, it doesn't mean much if people get sick. We pay our auditors to audit us against a standard.  If they overlook - or don't report -items as obvious as improper food contact surfaces, they are complicit.  

 

I have to be honest I do not know the details of this case and I take your point.  I made assumptions.  If indeed correct, poor auditing to this level is inexcusable and harms the integrity of certification standards.  I am actually a very strong advocate for effective Food Safety Management Systems implemented for the right reasons as well as competence, parity and professionalism of third party audits.  If we don't have this or strive hard for this then all of us who do this for the right reasons become scapegoats and that’s very sad. It will be interesting to see what happens in the fullness of time.

 

Regards,

Simon