SCCOM’S E1.2M TENDER MESS

MBABANE – It’s a tender mess. This best describes the confusion over the awarding of a tender for the provision of general architectural and design of offices for the Swaziland Competition Commission (SCCOM) at Ezulwini.

SCCOM had awarded the tender to Building Design Group (PTY) LTD but on review the Independent Review Commission (IRC) found that Design Architects (PTY) Limited was the suitable candidate.
The IRC which was head by lawyer Lucky Howe, stated that in its investigations, it found that the process was not in accordance with the law and it was not fair and transparent.

annulled

“The award by the respondent (SCCOM) to Building Design Group is set aside and annulled and is replaced with an award to Design Architects in the sum of E1 250 000, as a lump sum price inclusive of professional fees and expenses for executing the scope of the project,” reads part of the order issued by IRC.
The order by the IRC comes after Architects International (PTY) Limited filed an application for administrative review with the IRC.

In the application for review, Architects International, stated that it among other things noted the tender process was conducted by the commission, with no public component of the tenders on initial submission nor a public opening of the financial submissions of those firms who had achieved the minimum score in the technical submission.
“We feel the assessment of ‘non compliant’ is fundamentally erroneous and apart from excluding us for further assessment within the context of this tender; this has damaged our professional reputation,” reads part of the application for administrative review.

inconsistencies

The company went on to state that there were glaring inconsistencies in the application of the tender documents to the different bidding consultants.
According to Architects International, this further brought the integrity of the assessment process and that of the proposed award in question.
It further contended the inconsistency in determining Architects International non- complaint for not meeting a mandatory requirement for the invitation was clearly flaunted in allowing Design Architects to submit its bid, a bid which was confirmed by the absence of their names from the site meeting.

“Despite the fact that the ‘smaller the pool; ‘the greater our chances’, we question these omissions in the best interest of the tender process as well as the overall project,’’ contended the applicant.
It also argued that the exact nature and breakdown requirement of the tender sum was confusing and contradictory.

agree

“Apart from minor typographical and organisational inconsistencies in the Tender Document which were agree are not material to the issues at hand; there are glaring inconsistencies in the application for the tender document to different bidding consultants,” argued the company.

It was further the applicant’s averment that due to the fact that the tender was submitted in two parts (technical and financial), it would have expected that; to meet the requirements, the financial component of the bids should have been opened in a later public forum which, at the very least, the technically successful tenderers should have been invited.SCCOM  is currently operating at  the Mbabane office park fourth floor, north wing.

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: