Latest topics

Provision/s for No brand names ruling and No splitting of contracts

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Provision/s for No brand names ruling and No splitting of contracts

Post by mbdr on Wed Dec 07, 2011 5:42 pm

Good pm to all fellow govt procurement practitioners!

Please share with me your views on these:

What specific provision of RA 9184 relates to NO BRAND NAMES and NO SPLITTING OF CONTRACTS ruling. Also , please clarify what contracts are they referring to?

Please help, thank you so much.

mbdr

mbdr
Active Poster
Active Poster

Female Number of posts : 84
Age : 49
Company/Agency : LGU
Occupation/Designation : Govt. Employee/BAC Secretariat
Registration date : 2009-02-23

Back to top Go down

Re: Provision/s for No brand names ruling and No splitting of contracts

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Thu Dec 08, 2011 3:57 pm

mbdr wrote:Good pm to all fellow govt procurement practitioners!

Please share with me your views on these:

What specific provision of RA 9184 relates to NO BRAND NAMES and NO SPLITTING OF CONTRACTS ruling. Also , please clarify what contracts are they referring to?

Please help, thank you so much.

mbdr

The prohibition on reference to brand names is under Sec. 18 of R.A No. 9184. On the other hand, the prohibition against splitting of contracts is in Sec. 54 of the IRR. The definition of what constitutes splitting of contracts is also there.
avatar
RDV @ GP3i
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 1611
Company/Agency : DBM-Reg'l Office IV-B
Occupation/Designation : Regional Director/ Procurement Trainer
Registration date : 2008-09-04

http://gppphil.org/

Back to top Go down

Re: Provision/s for No brand names ruling and No splitting of contracts

Post by mbdr on Thu Dec 08, 2011 5:20 pm

Thanks RDV! gdpm

mbdr
Active Poster
Active Poster

Female Number of posts : 84
Age : 49
Company/Agency : LGU
Occupation/Designation : Govt. Employee/BAC Secretariat
Registration date : 2009-02-23

Back to top Go down

Re: Provision/s for No brand names ruling and No splitting of contracts

Post by Pidro on Mon Sep 24, 2012 2:13 pm

It is understood that indicating brand names in the PRs/ APPs/PPMPs is not allowed under the procurement law. However, how do we indicate the specs/ technical requirements for items such as printer inks, refills for ballpens, spareparts for motor vehicles, etc., which are ‘brand-specific’ (e.g., HP printers can only be filled by HP inks/ cartridges)?

Pidro
New Member
New Member

Male Number of posts : 3
Company/Agency : Gobyerno ng Pilipinas
Occupation/Designation : Clerk III
Registration date : 2012-09-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Provision/s for No brand names ruling and No splitting of contracts

Post by alpha1 on Mon Sep 24, 2012 5:51 pm

Pidro wrote:It is understood that indicating brand names in the PRs/ APPs/PPMPs is not allowed under the procurement law. However, how do we indicate the specs/ technical requirements for items such as printer inks, refills for ballpens, spareparts for motor vehicles, etc., which are ‘brand-specific’ (e.g., HP printers can only be filled by HP inks/ cartridges)?

These are exception to the rules. Even in the Philgeps catalogue, Ink printers are branded because as you have mentioned you cannot refill HP printers with Cannon ink and so as with refills for sign pens.

Good day!
avatar
alpha1
Active Poster
Active Poster

Male Number of posts : 145
Age : 54
Company/Agency : LGU
Occupation/Designation : Department Head
Registration date : 2010-03-12

Back to top Go down

Re: Provision/s for No brand names ruling and No splitting of contracts

Post by regina avelino on Tue Sep 25, 2012 9:31 am

Pidro wrote:
It is understood that indicating brand names in the PRs/ APPs/PPMPs is not allowed under the procurement law. However, how do we indicate the specs/ technical requirements for items such as printer inks, refills for ballpens, spareparts for motor vehicles, etc., which are ‘brand-specific’ (e.g., HP printers can only be filled by HP inks/ cartridges)?


please advise me if I'm wrong. Can we put in our technical specs the brand of printers the procuring entity has for the purchase of ink/cartidges/refill? I don't think that putting the brand of the printer the procuring entity has would mean a violation of the law on brand names. Once a prospective buyers learn of the brand of the printer, they would automatically know that the only compatible ink or refill would be HP.

On a different note if we put in the technical specs that we want to purchase HP inks, then it would be a violation. The law prohibits us from naming the brand of the items to be purchased but not the brand of the equipment/machine that the procuring entity has.

Please comment

regina avelino
Board General
Board General

Female Number of posts : 669
Company/Agency : gocc ncr
Occupation/Designation : staff
Registration date : 2012-02-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Provision/s for No brand names ruling and No splitting of contracts

Post by Pidro on Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:51 pm

@sir alpha1, I think it would be helpful if the GPPB would be able issue guidelines/ circulars treating on the matter. It would be very difficult to cite the Philgeps catalogue as a basis for answering the findings/AOM of the COA if and when the auditors will be strictly auditing our transactions. I believe that most, if not all, government agencies have encountered this kind of situation wherein we put brand names in our PRs (esp. computer inks).

@ ma’am regina, comment lang po - I think the first situation you have presented is an indirect circumvention of the prohibition on brand names. In legalese, what you cannot do directly, you cannot do indirectly.

On the other hand, I think that the second option you had presented is more acceptable, as the law specifically requires that only the tech specs or performance requirements (w/o mentioning the brand) shall be used describing the items to be purchased. Altho, it would be probably seen as tailor-fitting your procurement but then it would be more in conformity with the requirements of the law.

In sum, I really hope that the GPPB would be able to address this issue. Good day to all and thanks.

Pidro
New Member
New Member

Male Number of posts : 3
Company/Agency : Gobyerno ng Pilipinas
Occupation/Designation : Clerk III
Registration date : 2012-09-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Provision/s for No brand names ruling and No splitting of contracts

Post by alpha1 on Tue Sep 25, 2012 2:31 pm

On a different note if we put in the technical specs that we want to purchase HP inks, then it would be a violation. The law prohibits us from naming the brand of the items to be purchased but not the brand of the equipment/machine that the procuring entity has.

Please comment[/quote]

I agree that we cannot put brand names in our procurement but by saying that we want ink cartridge for HP printer, isn't it tantamount as saying that we want HP ink cartridge? As I have mentioned before even PhilGEPS catalogue specifically indicates the brands when it comes to ink cartridge maybe because they already anticipates that a certain brand of ink cartridge could not be use to another brand of printer.

Cheers!
avatar
alpha1
Active Poster
Active Poster

Male Number of posts : 145
Age : 54
Company/Agency : LGU
Occupation/Designation : Department Head
Registration date : 2010-03-12

Back to top Go down

Re: Provision/s for No brand names ruling and No splitting of contracts

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum