 |
 |
|
|
(1) |
|
The CPTU shall issue a detailed procedure governing the functioning of the Review
Panel. |
|
|
|
|
|
(2) |
|
The CPTU shall not be involved in the resolution of the complaint but shall provide
logistic support to the Review Panel in the discharge of its functions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
However, the following notes are issued in order to provide Procuring Entities with
examples of the types of occurrences that might lead to a complaint being submitted
by an Applicant, Tenderer, Supplier, Contractor or Consultant. This list is not considered
to contain every conceivable issue or occurrence that might give rise to complaint
from an Applicant, Tenderer, Supplier, Contractor or Consultant. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Procuring Entity shall handle all procurement proceedings fully in accordance with
the Regulations and the Procedures. If they fail to do so, any person or firm or Tenderer
may submit a complaint concerning any action on the part of a Procuring Entity that
is considered not to comply with the Regulations or the Procedures. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
However, some common examples of circumstances in which a formal complaint may be
lodged against a Procuring Entity are outlined below and are by no means exhausting
all possibilities. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Invitations for Pre-qualification: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
Inadequate time allowed through advertisement by the Procuring Entity for Invitation
for Pre-qualification; |
|
|
|
|
- |
Invitation for Pre-qualification documents were not ready when the advertisement was
published by the Procuring Entity or not available when requested by a potential Applicant; |
|
|
|
|
- |
Failure to respond promptly to a request for clarification from a potential Applicant; |
|
|
|
|
- |
Failure by the TEC to follow the qualification criteria stated in the Invitation for
Pre-qualification; |
|
|
|
|
- |
Biased/unfair qualification criteria; and |
|
|
|
|
- |
Perceived unfair denial of pre-qualification. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Open Tendering Method:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
Advertisement not properly done following the Regulation 21; |
|
|
|
|
- |
Inadequate time allowed through advertisement by the Procuring Entity for Invitation
for Tender (inadequate tendering period); |
|
|
|
|
- |
Invitation for Tender documents were not ready when the advertisement was published
by the Procuring Entity or not available when requested by a potential Tenderer; |
|
|
|
|
- |
Failure to respond promptly to a request for clarification from a potential Tenderer; |
|
|
|
|
- |
Technical specification that can be met by only one or a small number of manufacturers; |
|
|
|
|
- |
Failure to hold an advertised pre-tender meeting or to properly notify potential Tenderers
of a change in the date/location/time, etc. that resulted in some potential Tenderers
failing to attend the meeting; |
|
|
|
|
- |
Failure to hold the tender opening as stated in the Invitation for Tenders and/or
improper conduct at the tender opening; |
|
|
|
|
- |
Mishandling of tenders received from Tenderers resulting in the early opening of one
or more tenders that produces either a loss of confidentiality of the tender or an
actual failure to open a tender at a public opening; |
|
|
|
|
- |
Failure to open all tenders which were received prior to the deadline for the submission
of tenders; |
|
|
|
|
- |
Failure by the TEC to comply with the tender evaluation criteria stated in the Invitation
for Tenders; |
|
|
|
|
- |
Any attempt by the Procuring Entity to ‘negotiate’ with the successful Tenderer. |
|
|
|
|
- |
Biased evaluation criteria; and |
|
|
|
|
- |
Perceived unfair or erroneous award of contract. |
|
|
|
|
Restricted Tendering Method: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All the points mentioned in the Open Tendering Method as may be relevant for Restricted
Tendering Method. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct Procurement Method: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All the points mentioned in the Open Tendering Method as may be relevant for Direct
Procurement Method. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Two-stage Tendering Method: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All the points mentioned in the Open Tendering Method as may be relevant for Two-Stage
Tendering Method, with the following additional example: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
A breaking of confidentiality by the Procuring Entity at the time of discussions with
each Tenderer during the evaluation of the first-stage tender. |
|
|
|
|
Request for Quotations Method: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All the points mentioned in the Open Tendering Method as may be relevant for the Requests
for Quotations Method. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Request for Expressions of Interest: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
Inadequate time allowed through advertisement by the Procuring Entity for request
for Expressions of Interest; |
|
|
|
|
- |
Expressions of Interest documents not ready when advertisement published by the Procuring
Entity or not available when requested by a potential Applicant; and |
|
|
|
|
- |
Failure to respond promptly to a request for clarification from a potential Applicant. |
|
|
|
|
Requests for Proposals: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
Inadequate time allowed by the Procuring Entity for the preparation and submission
of proposals; |
|
|
|
|
- |
Failure on the part of the Procuring Entity to maintain confidentiality following
the opening of the envelopes containing the technical proposals; |
|
|
|
|
- |
Opening of the financial proposals in error at the same time as the opening of the
technical proposals; |
|
|
|
|
- |
Failure to evaluate the proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria set out
in the RFP; |
|
|
|
|
- |
Attempt by the Procuring Entity to force a Consultant to revise fee rates during the
negotiation of the contract; and |
|
|
|
|
- |
Perceived unfair award of contract. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|