Latest topics
Statistics
We have 1676 registered usersThe newest registered user is esagile
Our users have posted a total of 1240 messages in 351 subjects
Who is online?
In total there are 4 users online :: 0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 4 Guests None
Most users ever online was 225 on Sun Oct 03, 2021 4:24 pm
SUPPLIER CHANGING THE REQUIREMENTS WITH ADDITION COSTS
3 posters
Tanzania Public Procurement Forum :: PROCUREMENT PROCESSES AND MANAGEMENT :: Tendering Processes, Procedures and related Guidelines
Page 1 of 1
Re: SUPPLIER CHANGING THE REQUIREMENTS WITH ADDITION COSTS
My advise is concurrent to Mauka's conclusion, that the PE should reject the award and call for next lowest evaluated bidder if at all meet the specs as required by XDC. On other hand if found in additional of 50 mill from the anticipated lowest bidder will be within the budget of XDC and the amount still lower than the second evaluated bidder, the XDC should consider Rg 117(4, 8 & 9) to approve that amount then award the contract to that supplier.
GadielCM- Posts : 69
Join date : 2009-08-21
Re: SUPPLIER CHANGING THE REQUIREMENTS WITH ADDITION COSTS
basing on your scenario, i think the supplier was required to provide a full description or analysis of the motor Grader including its dimensions, availability, costs and physical properties so that basing on detailed analysis, the Xdc could be in better position to ascertain the successful bidder.
but the supplier seems to did the opposite by submitting incomplete information either intentional {due to deliberate misstatement of tender documents} or unintentional { due to incompetence} especially on the availability of motor Grader with their models.
therefore, i think the Xdc should refuse to award a contract to the winner because i don't see if there is any obligation to accept the revised tender which has shown all the sign of frauds, and in this case, the contract should be awarded to the next lowest bidder
but the supplier seems to did the opposite by submitting incomplete information either intentional {due to deliberate misstatement of tender documents} or unintentional { due to incompetence} especially on the availability of motor Grader with their models.
therefore, i think the Xdc should refuse to award a contract to the winner because i don't see if there is any obligation to accept the revised tender which has shown all the sign of frauds, and in this case, the contract should be awarded to the next lowest bidder
mauka- Posts : 24
Join date : 2010-05-15
SUPPLIER CHANGING THE REQUIREMENTS WITH ADDITION COSTS
X District Council [XDC] advertised the tender for supply Motor Grader. The specifications in the bidding documents based on functional and performance for the Motor Grader to be supplied. No query received by XDC from the prospective bidders on the specifications which implied that prospective bidders understood the requirements of XDC. Three supplies submitted their offers before deadline and were opened publicly. The Evaluation Committee [EC] was constituted according to the requirements of the laws. After evaluation EC recommended award to the supplier who quoted Model W for Tshs. 240 millions VAT inclusive. Tender Board blessed the recommendations of the EC and eventually M/s was awarded the contract.
The notification of award was sent to the supplier on the following day. On receipt the letter, supplier wrote back to XDC explaining that the Model W quoted his tender is no longer available in the market. The available model is Model Y which higher version than W. In same letter supplier informed XDC that he will supply Model Y but they have to top up Tshs. 50 millions. At this stage no contract had been signed by the parties.
What is your advise to XDC?
The notification of award was sent to the supplier on the following day. On receipt the letter, supplier wrote back to XDC explaining that the Model W quoted his tender is no longer available in the market. The available model is Model Y which higher version than W. In same letter supplier informed XDC that he will supply Model Y but they have to top up Tshs. 50 millions. At this stage no contract had been signed by the parties.
What is your advise to XDC?
RJM- Posts : 260
Join date : 2009-07-30
Age : 73
Location : What is written without effort is in general read without pleasure
Similar topics
» ADOPTION OF E-PRCOUREMENT AND VALUE ADDITION OT TANZANIAN PUBLIC INSITTUTIONS
» How Supplier can register in e-Procurement system (TANePS)
» SELECTION OF SUPPLIER/SERVICE PROVIDER FOR CUIS
» How Supplier can register in e-Procurement system (TANePS)
» SELECTION OF SUPPLIER/SERVICE PROVIDER FOR CUIS
Tanzania Public Procurement Forum :: PROCUREMENT PROCESSES AND MANAGEMENT :: Tendering Processes, Procedures and related Guidelines
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:13 pm by yohanaamon@yahoo.com
» Is non-submission of invalid CRB receipt voucher a major deviation?
Tue Dec 17, 2019 1:00 am by RJM
» MAKANDARASI KUWEKWA NDANI KWA KUTOKAMILISHA MIRADI NDANI YA MUDA
Tue Dec 17, 2019 12:46 am by RJM
» How Supplier can register in e-Procurement system (TANePS)
Thu Dec 12, 2019 5:48 am by pms
» Kukosekana risiti ya ununuzi wa tenda
Sat Apr 27, 2019 6:05 pm by ALLY MUNIR
» IS IT TIME TO THINK OF DEACTIVATING TENDER BOARDS AND INTRODUCE A MECHANISM OF PROCUREMENT PROFESSIONAL OPINION?
Thu Apr 11, 2019 3:40 pm by pms
» e-Procurement System is now operational
Thu Apr 11, 2019 3:14 pm by Admin
» TENDA ZINAPOKOSA WAOMBAJI
Thu Jan 10, 2019 10:42 pm by thanksme
» Attendance of District Treasurer in Council Tender Board meetings
Mon Mar 19, 2018 8:57 pm by GWK