Oxebridge has filed a new complaint against the certification body Intertek asking it to investigate its remote auditing practices related to a single client. The audits were originally performed by SAI Global, but SAI was purchased by Intertek, who now certifies the company in question.
The complaint came about as multiple whistleblowers reported to Oxebridge a disturbing trend related to an ISO 9001 certified manufacturing company in the US, which Oxebridge has elected to keep anonymous for now. The allegations are that the company mandated a “no onsite audit” policy for years, forcing SAI Global — and now Intertek — to do 100% remote audits instead. Rather than invoke COVID-19, the company allegedly claimed that its machine shop was “confidential” and threatened to cancel the ISO 9001 contract if the CB refused. Rather than use nondisclosure agreements and comply with ISO 17021-1 rules on confidentiality, SAI/Intertek is alleged to have surrendered to the financial threat and performed fully remote audits, including at least one 3-year recertification audit.
Additional allegations were made that the company used the “remote audit” demand to scam Intertek by providing fake evidence. Intertek, the whistleblowers allege, never performed proper sampling or audit trail practices to verify the evidence and accepted it as sufficient to issue an ISO 9001 certificate. Multiple witnesses reported that the falsification of audit evidence was rampant at the company. Oxebridge reviewed messages between employees appearing to confirm this allegation.
The company then used the ISO 9001 certificate to gain access to US Dept. of Defense and military contracts, raising questions of False Claims Act violations.
The whistleblowers also allege OSHA violations and other worker safety issues at the plant, including toxic fires. Those allegations are being processed through other means, not Intertek. However, Oxebridge argues that had SAI or Intertek performed on-site audits, they might have identified these alleged practices and raised them with management. The company’s employee count is below the threshold for direct OSHA oversight, regardless of the severity of the risks.
For now, the complaint makes it clear that these are allegations and that Oxebridge has not directly validated all of them. Whistleblowers insist, however, that email trails and audit evidence held by Intertek itself will prove their case. Oxebridge has said the allegations are, however, “credible,” and is calling on Intertek to invoke a rarely-used rule allowing a CB to perform an unannounced onsite “Short Notice Audit,” which is allowed by ISO 17021-1 in response to complaints.
