The company received the second and third surveillance by a lead assessor Mr. T (see " Assessment scene" column on the left side of this homepage, titled " Mr.T, notorious assessor, appeared again"(2002. Aug.1w).
Against his worst assessment the company made claim to his certification body with about twenty pages reports. The reports consist of 10 items. The company says it will disclose the reports on its homepage of its web site sequentially. I got them beforehand and from them I picked up six items and summarized each of them as follows.

No.1: Assessor's attitude acted big and sometimes spurted anger against auditee's counterarguments.
He said that when he pointed out about ten nonconformities in another company, it pleaded with him to decrease nonconformities, so he decreased them in mercy! It showed his typical tyrant assessment attitude.

No.2: In the surveillances he did prohibited sales activities of consulting for preparations for ISO9001: 2000
The surveillances were done on the requirements of ISO9001: 1994, but he often referred to his experiences on consulting for preparations for ISO9001: 2000, implying his consulting offer.

No.3: He said what broke dawn the reliability of his certification body.
The company got the certification of ISO9001: 1994, applying design control over its design of software. The assessor said in the surveillances that he could not admit its application to software as design activities. The saying, in fact, disgraced his own certification body's name, because it ignored formal ISO9001: 1994 ( not ISO9002: 1994) registration by his certification body.

No4: He was persistent on making documented procedures about operations using a stapler.
The company is a bookbinder and has a process to fasten papers together with a stapler. It is a so simple process that the company made no documented procedure and did only subscribed OJT. The assessor persistently demanded to make the documented procedure over and over during the two surveillances. The company rejected to make it, because its operation was very simple and ISO9001: 1994 says a simple operation with adequate trainings makes documented procedures unnecessary.

No.5: He said annual management review was not enough.
The company is a small business with about twenty people. Therefore, the president usually is busy with sales and finance. And the management representative, the president's brother, often did binding jobs. The both did various conversations over their detailed jobs. The assessor might consider all of these conversations were those that were done between the president and the management representative.

No6: He pointed out two nonconformities with no evidence.
He pointed out following two nonconformities in the third surveillance.
(1) The old revision of Quality manual was used.
(2) Re-inspection results were not recorded.

About (1), the management representative said the document to which the assessor referred was stamped a mark of " NON-CONTROLLED". Therefore, the assessor's pointing was a mistake. He might overlook the stamp.
About (2), there were records in a note. The assessor also overlooked it.
Finally the management representative rejected to sign the nonconformity reports.

He made a claim to a manager of the certification body. The manager came to the company and retracted the two nonconformities.