Latest topics
» No Objection Letter
Sat Dec 16, 2017 5:21 pm by zeph03

» CATERING SERVICES FOR CONGRESSIONAL MEET AT SAGBAYAN, BOHOL
Thu Dec 14, 2017 7:14 pm by btorres4

» PURCHASE OF FERTILIZERS FOR LIVESTOCK, CORN, HVCDP, INLAND FISHERY, AND ORGANIC PROGRAM
Thu Dec 14, 2017 4:35 pm by btorres4

» Newspaper Publication
Thu Dec 14, 2017 4:10 pm by btorres4

» RENTAL OF LIGHTS AND SOUND SYSTEM
Thu Dec 14, 2017 3:46 pm by btorres4

» Newspaper Publication
Wed Dec 13, 2017 9:50 pm by btorres4

» PURCHASE OF OTHER SUPPLIES FOR SB OFFICE
Wed Dec 13, 2017 4:51 pm by btorres4

» PURCHASE OF RICE FOR FOOD SUPPLIES OF PEACE & ORDER CAMPAIGN
Wed Dec 13, 2017 3:19 pm by btorres4

» Expired Tax Clearance during payment
Wed Dec 13, 2017 3:11 pm by vallemaco6224

» PURCHASE OF MEDICINE FOR MHO
Wed Dec 13, 2017 2:53 pm by btorres4


Misplaced Document

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Misplaced Document

Post by tekk on Tue Jun 09, 2009 5:46 pm

If one of the required documents listed under the Financial Envelope was misplaced and found on the Legal Envelope, will it be considered a failure on the eligibility requirements?
avatar
tekk
New Member
New Member

Male Number of posts : 3
Company/Agency : Government
Occupation/Designation : Employee
Registration date : 2009-06-09

Back to top Go down

Re: Misplaced Document

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Tue Jun 09, 2009 6:22 pm

tekk wrote:If one of the required documents listed under the Financial Envelope was misplaced and found on the Legal Envelope, will it be considered a failure on the eligibility requirements?

I find your question a bit confusing, so I will just make an assumption. I assume that you are conducting an eligibility check here.

If you are conducting an eligibility check, there is only one envelope to speak of, which is the eligibility envelope, which contails the legal, technical and financial requirements. There could be no separate financial envelope and legal envelope within the eligibility envelope. In other words, the situation you are referring to would not happen.
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: Misplaced Document

Post by tekk on Tue Jun 09, 2009 6:38 pm

RDV, thank you for your prompt response.

Yes, we are conducting an eligibility check. Some of the bidders group the legal, technical and financial documents with another envelope, thus the scenario I posted.

In any case, if a document is filed in the wrong set of documents, would this be a cause for failure of bid?
avatar
tekk
New Member
New Member

Male Number of posts : 3
Company/Agency : Government
Occupation/Designation : Employee
Registration date : 2009-06-09

Back to top Go down

Re: Misplaced Document

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Tue Jun 09, 2009 6:44 pm

tekk wrote:RDV, thank you for your prompt response.

Yes, we are conducting an eligibility check. Some of the bidders group the legal, technical and financial documents with another envelope, thus the scenario I posted.

In any case, if a document is filed in the wrong set of documents, would this be a cause for failure of bid?

So, they have separate envelopes for the legal, technical and financial requirements, and then these 3 envelopes are contained all in the eligibility envelope? If they did that, which is not required in the GRPA and IRR-A, and the documents got interchanged in the process between any of the "3 envelopes', but all the required documents are all in the eligibility envelope anyway, I dont think you need to disqualify the bidder. And on what basis are you going to disqualify them? For not following instructions? Maybe, but, I think, you can't disqualify them for failing the eligibility check since the required documents are all in the eligibility envelope anyway.


Last edited by RDV on Wed Jun 10, 2009 9:07 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : It was a mistake when I wrote this: "Maybe, but I don't think you can't disqualify them for failing the eligibility check...")
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: Misplaced Document

Post by venom.0420 on Tue Jun 09, 2009 8:30 pm

tekk wrote:If one of the required documents listed under the Financial Envelope was misplaced and found on the Legal Envelope, will it be considered a failure on the eligibility requirements?

hi tekk,

Like RDV, 'm also confused with ur post. I know that eligibility documents, technical bid and financial bid are sealed in three separate envelopes, but I'm not aware of any requirement that legal, technical and financial docs found in the eligibility envelopes should also be submitted separately.

Nwei, to answer ur post, since the legal, technical and financial docs are all eligibility docs which are supposedly sealed in one envelope, but in ur case, submitted separately, shall still be considered eligible as long as the requirements in the checklist are present.

Hope this helps. Very Happy
avatar
venom.0420
Active Poster
Active Poster

Male Number of posts : 98
Company/Agency : Government
Occupation/Designation : Government Employee
Registration date : 2009-01-05

Back to top Go down

Re: Misplaced Document

Post by sunriser431 on Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:32 pm

tekk wrote:RDV, thank you for your prompt response.

Yes, we are conducting an eligibility check. Some of the bidders group the legal, technical and financial documents with another envelope, thus the scenario I posted.

In any case, if a document is filed in the wrong set of documents, would this be a cause for failure of bid?

My assumption this is for Procurement of Goods
PBD for Goods
24.Sealing and Marking of Bids
24.1.Unless otherwise indicated in the BDS, Bidders shall enclose their original Eligibility Documents described in ITB Clause 13.2 sealed in a separate envelope marked “ORIGINAL - ELIGIBILITY DOCUMENTS”, the original of their Technical Proposal in one sealed envelope marked “ORIGINAL - TECHNICAL PROPOSAL”, and the original of their Financial Proposal in another sealed envelope marked “ORIGINAL - FINANCIAL PROPOSAL”, sealing them all in an outer envelope marked “ORIGINAL BID”. Each copy of the Eligibility Documents, Technical Proposal, and Financial Proposal shall be similarly sealed duly marking the inner envelopes as “COPY NO. ___ - ELIGIBILITY DOCUMENTS”, “COPY NO. ___ - TECHNICAL PROPOSAL”, and “COPY NO. ___ – FINANCIAL PROPOSAL” and the outer envelope as “COPY NO. ___”, respectively. These envelopes containing the original and the copies shall then be enclosed in one single envelope.
24.2
xxxxx
24.3. If all envelopes are not sealed and marked as required, the PROCURING ENTITY will assume no responsibility for the misplacement or premature opening of the Bid.
This is Self explanatory. I hope you find this useful. Smile
avatar
sunriser431
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 1518
Company/Agency : Goccs Jolo Sulu All the way Downsouth
Occupation/Designation : IAS
Registration date : 2009-05-07

Back to top Go down

Re: Misplaced Document

Post by tekk on Wed Jun 10, 2009 8:09 am

Thank you for all the responses. These are very helpful.
avatar
tekk
New Member
New Member

Male Number of posts : 3
Company/Agency : Government
Occupation/Designation : Employee
Registration date : 2009-06-09

Back to top Go down

Re: Misplaced Document

Post by engrjhez® on Wed Jun 10, 2009 9:53 am

tekk wrote:If one of the required documents listed under the Financial Envelope was misplaced and found on the Legal Envelope, will it be considered a failure on the eligibility requirements?
I would like to take one step further (anyone can comment). Supposed the bidder who has a misplaced bid price in the eligibility envelope has another bid price which doesn't agree with that found earlier. What would be the ruling:

1. The bidder is later disqualified by submitting alternative bids (which is definitely not allowed); or
2. The bid price in the financial envelope is to be considered, and the first bid price found on the eligibility envelope be disregarded.

For discussion purposes only. Very Happy
avatar
engrjhez®
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 2481
Age : 39
Company/Agency : City Government of Bacoor [Region IV-A, Province of Cavite]
Occupation/Designation : Office of the City Legal Service (OCLS) / Certified National Trainer - PhilGEPS
Registration date : 2008-10-31

http://www.bacoor.gov.ph

Back to top Go down

Re: Misplaced Document

Post by riddler on Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:28 am

RDV wrote:
tekk wrote:RDV, thank you for your prompt response.

Yes, we are conducting an eligibility check. Some of the bidders group the legal, technical and financial documents with another envelope, thus the scenario I posted.

In any case, if a document is filed in the wrong set of documents, would this be a cause for failure of bid?

So, they have separate envelopes for the legal, technical and financial requirements, and then these 3 envelopes are contained all in the eligibility envelope? If they did that, which is not required in the GRPA and IRR-A, and the documents got interchanged in the process between any of the "3 envelopes', but all the required documents are all in the eligibility envelope anyway, I dont think you need to disqualify the bidder. And on what basis are you going to disqualify them? For not following instructions? Maybe, but, I think, you can't disqualify them for failing the eligibility check since the required documents are all in the eligibility envelope anyway.

I agree RDV. As long as these document are all ELIGIBILITY DOCUMENTS contained/included in the ELIGIBILITY ENVELOPE, no haRM done. otherwise, if there are documents that are supposed to be found in the Technical requirements and financial requirement, which were in included in the Elgibility documents, The BAC can readily rule a "Non-Compliance" on the bidder.

here's the catch. What if the in the Eligibilty (Financial) Documents, the Bidder submitted a 10% Cash DEposit specific of the project/goods, instead instead of NFCC? Do we need to require the Bidder a 10% Cash Deposit for the Technical Component envelope of the Bid?

Take Note that the Cash Deposit found in the Eligibilty Documents are "original certificates" or monetary values.
avatar
riddler
Board General
Board General

Male Number of posts : 598
Company/Agency : lgu
Occupation/Designation : endyeenel
Registration date : 2009-03-03

Back to top Go down

Re: Misplaced Document

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:38 am

ruel t. wrote:
here's the catch. What if the in the Eligibilty (Financial) Documents, the Bidder submitted a 10% Cash DEposit specific of the project/goods, instead instead of NFCC? Do we need to require the Bidder a 10% Cash Deposit for the Technical Component envelope of the Bid?

Take Note that the Cash Deposit found in the Eligibilty Documents are "original certificates" or monetary values.

If a bidder has submitted a CDC/credit line in its eligibility envelope, there is no longer a need to require the same in the Technical proposal.

Consider this provision of Sec. 25.3.A.7 and 25.3.B.11:

"7. Commitment from a licensed bank to extend to the bidder a credit line if awarded the contract to be bid, or a cash deposit certificate, in an amount not lower than that set by the procuring entity in the Bidding Documents, which shall be at least equal to ten percent (10%) of the approved budget for the contract to be bid: Provided, however, That if the bidder previously submitted this document as an eligibility requirement, the said previously submitted document shall suffice;"
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: Misplaced Document

Post by riddler on Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:54 am

RDV wrote:
ruel t. wrote:
here's the catch. What if the in the Eligibilty (Financial) Documents, the Bidder submitted a 10% Cash DEposit specific of the project/goods, instead instead of NFCC? Do we need to require the Bidder a 10% Cash Deposit for the Technical Component envelope of the Bid?

Take Note that the Cash Deposit found in the Eligibilty Documents are "original certificates" or monetary values.

If a bidder has submitted a CDC/credit line in its eligibility envelope, there is no longer a need to require the same in the Technical proposal.

Consider this provision of Sec. 25.3.A.7 and 25.3.B.11:

"7. Commitment from a licensed bank to extend to the bidder a credit line if awarded the contract to be bid, or a cash deposit certificate, in an amount not lower than that set by the procuring entity in the Bidding Documents, which shall be at least equal to ten percent (10%) of the approved budget for the contract to be bid: Provided, however, That if the bidder previously submitted this document as an eligibility requirement, the said previously submitted document shall suffice;"


ha ha ha Very Happy thanks RDV.
avatar
riddler
Board General
Board General

Male Number of posts : 598
Company/Agency : lgu
Occupation/Designation : endyeenel
Registration date : 2009-03-03

Back to top Go down

Re: Misplaced Document

Post by sunriser431 on Wed Jun 10, 2009 1:59 pm

RDV wrote:
ruel t. wrote:
here's the catch. What if the in the Eligibilty (Financial) Documents, the Bidder submitted a 10% Cash DEposit specific of the project/goods, instead instead of NFCC? Do we need to require the Bidder a 10% Cash Deposit for the Technical Component envelope of the Bid?

Take Note that the Cash Deposit found in the Eligibilty Documents are "original certificates" or monetary values.

If a bidder has submitted a CDC/credit line in its eligibility envelope, there is no longer a need to require the same in the Technical proposal.

Consider this provision of Sec. 25.3.A.7 and 25.3.B.11:

"7. Commitment from a licensed bank to extend to the bidder a credit line if awarded the contract to be bid, or a cash deposit certificate, in an amount not lower than that set by the procuring entity in the Bidding Documents, which shall be at least equal to ten percent (10%) of the approved budget for the contract to be bid: Provided, however, That if the bidder previously submitted this document as an eligibility requirement, the said previously submitted document shall suffice;"

Sir RDV for clarification only.
Scenario 1. For FIRST TIME bidder they are required to submit the following documents (SF-GOOD-06)
A) Class "A" Financial documents Eligibility
1.xxx
2.NFCC (SF-GOOD-14)
3.Credit Line Certificate (SF-GOOD-15)
4.Cash Deposit Certificate (SF-GOOD-16)
B) Technical Requirements (SF-GOOD-26)
1.xxx
2.Credit Line Certificate (SF-GOOD-15)
3.Cash Deposit Certificate (SF-GOOD-16)
Scenario 2. For SECOND TIME bidder(same bidder in scenario 1) they are required to submit the following documents (SF-GOOD-26)
A) Class "A" Financial documents Eligibility
1. Certification in lieu of Class “A” Documents.or Registration Certificate (SF-GOOD-20)
Note: This document certifies that the Class “A” Documents are complete, current and updated. Presence of this document shall forego the checking of the Class “A” Documents. or all requirements listed under Legal, Technical and Financial Documents
B) Technical Requirements (SF-GOOD-26)
1.xxx
2.Credit Line Certificate (SF-GOOD-15)
3.Cash Deposit Certificate (SF-GOOD-16)

My question. In the 2nd case scenario will it still be require for the bidder to submit the SF-GOOD-15 and SF-GOOD-16? as specified in Sec. 25.3.A.7 or 25.3.B.11: or my guess if its still required for purpose of updating?
avatar
sunriser431
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 1518
Company/Agency : Goccs Jolo Sulu All the way Downsouth
Occupation/Designation : IAS
Registration date : 2009-05-07

Back to top Go down

Re: Misplaced Document

Post by riddler on Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:07 pm

engrjhez wrote:
I would like to take one step further (anyone can comment). Supposed the bidder who has a misplaced bid price in the eligibility envelope has another bid price which doesn't agree with that found earlier. What would be the ruling:
1. The bidder is later disqualified by submitting alternative bids (which is definitely not allowed); or
2. The bid price in the financial envelope is to be considered, and the first bid price found on the eligibility envelope be disregarded.

For discussion purposes only. Very Happy[/justify][/color]

1. It would be better to right away declare a non-compliant engrjhez, thus the bidder is "failed" on the ground that Bidder is not following instructions as stated in the ITB. Sasakit ulo ng BAC pag walang lesson learned on the part of the Bidder/s.
avatar
riddler
Board General
Board General

Male Number of posts : 598
Company/Agency : lgu
Occupation/Designation : endyeenel
Registration date : 2009-03-03

Back to top Go down

Re: Misplaced Document

Post by engrjhez® on Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:17 pm

ruel t. wrote:

1. It would be better to right away declare a non-compliant engrjhez, thus the bidder is "failed" on the ground that Bidder is not following instructions as stated in the ITB. Sasakit ulo ng BAC pag walang lesson learned on the part of the Bidder/s.

The bidder could argue that, they are not actually non-complying because there is only one bid price in the financial envelope. They can claim further that since the Bid Price has nothing to do with the Eligibility Envelope, they can just "throw it out". Very Happy
avatar
engrjhez®
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 2481
Age : 39
Company/Agency : City Government of Bacoor [Region IV-A, Province of Cavite]
Occupation/Designation : Office of the City Legal Service (OCLS) / Certified National Trainer - PhilGEPS
Registration date : 2008-10-31

http://www.bacoor.gov.ph

Back to top Go down

Re: Misplaced Document

Post by riddler on Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:50 pm

engrjhez wrote:The bidder could argue that, they are not actually non-complying because there is only one bid price in the financial envelope. They can claim further that since the Bid Price has nothing to do with the Eligibility Envelope, they can just "throw it out".

The Content of Eligibilty Envelope are clearly indicated in the checklist and the PBD, if the BAC shall somewhat bend the rules on this matter, it will be inviting more questions than answers.
avatar
riddler
Board General
Board General

Male Number of posts : 598
Company/Agency : lgu
Occupation/Designation : endyeenel
Registration date : 2009-03-03

Back to top Go down

Re: Misplaced Document

Post by sunriser431 on Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:57 pm

ruel t. wrote:
engrjhez wrote:The bidder could argue that, they are not actually non-complying because there is only one bid price in the financial envelope. They can claim further that since the Bid Price has nothing to do with the Eligibility Envelope, they can just "throw it out".

The Content of Eligibilty Envelope are clearly indicated in the checklist and the PBD, if the BAC shall somewhat bend the rules on this matter, it will be inviting more questions than answers.


PBD For Goods
9.Content of the Bidding Documents
9.1 xxx
9.2 xxx
9.3 The Bidder is expected to examine all instructions, forms, terms, and specifications in the Bidding Documents. Unless otherwise indicated in the BDS, failure to furnish all information or documentation required in the Bidding Documents shall result in the rejection of the Bid and the disqualification of the Bidder.

IRR-A of GPRA
17.7 Responsibility of Prospective or Eligible Bidder
17.7.1 A prospective or eligible bidder shall be responsible for:
a) Having taken steps to carefully examine all of the bidding documents
b) xxxx
c) xxxx
d) xxxx
Failure to observe any of the above responsibilities shall be at the risk of the prospective bidder or eligible bidder concerned. xxxxx
Sharing my insight Smile
avatar
sunriser431
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 1518
Company/Agency : Goccs Jolo Sulu All the way Downsouth
Occupation/Designation : IAS
Registration date : 2009-05-07

Back to top Go down

Re: Misplaced Document

Post by engrjhez® on Wed Jun 10, 2009 6:35 pm


PBD For Goods
9.Content of the Bidding Documents
9.1 xxx
9.2 xxx
9.3 The Bidder is expected to examine all instructions, forms, terms, and specifications in the Bidding Documents. Unless otherwise indicated in the BDS, failure to furnish all information or documentation required in the Bidding Documents shall result in the rejection of the Bid and the disqualification of the Bidder.

IRR-A of GPRA
17.7 Responsibility of Prospective or Eligible Bidder
17.7.1 A prospective or eligible bidder shall be responsible for:
a) Having taken steps to carefully examine all of the bidding documents
b) xxxx
c) xxxx
d) xxxx
Failure to observe any of the above responsibilities shall be at the risk of the prospective bidder or eligible bidder concerned. xxxxx
Sharing my insight Smile
The question now is, does the insertion of bid prices in the eligibility envelope constitutes a violation? where in fact a bid price is independently found in the financial envelope later?

->Sec.9.3 of PBD only stated what to expect from bidders as to completeness;

->Sec.17.7.1 of the IRR-A only reminds us of the self examination of bids;

The real argument is that, provided all documents of the required envelopes contained all the necessary documents, does the excess document in the eligibility envelope is a ground for INELIGIBILITY? Twisted Evil
avatar
engrjhez®
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 2481
Age : 39
Company/Agency : City Government of Bacoor [Region IV-A, Province of Cavite]
Occupation/Designation : Office of the City Legal Service (OCLS) / Certified National Trainer - PhilGEPS
Registration date : 2008-10-31

http://www.bacoor.gov.ph

Back to top Go down

Re: Misplaced Document

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Wed Jun 10, 2009 6:54 pm

sunriser431 wrote:Sir RDV for clarification only.
Scenario 1. For FIRST TIME bidder they are required to submit the following documents (SF-GOOD-06)
A) Class "A" Financial documents Eligibility
1.xxx
2.NFCC (SF-GOOD-14)
3.Credit Line Certificate (SF-GOOD-15)
4.Cash Deposit Certificate (SF-GOOD-16)
B) Technical Requirements (SF-GOOD-26)
1.xxx
2.Credit Line Certificate (SF-GOOD-15)
3.Cash Deposit Certificate (SF-GOOD-16)
Scenario 2. For SECOND TIME bidder(same bidder in scenario 1) they are required to submit the following documents (SF-GOOD-26)
A) Class "A" Financial documents Eligibility
1. Certification in lieu of Class “A” Documents.or Registration Certificate (SF-GOOD-20)
Note: This document certifies that the Class “A” Documents are complete, current and updated. Presence of this document shall forego the checking of the Class “A” Documents. or all requirements listed under Legal, Technical and Financial Documents
B) Technical Requirements (SF-GOOD-26)
1.xxx
2.Credit Line Certificate (SF-GOOD-15)
3.Cash Deposit Certificate (SF-GOOD-16)

My question. In the 2nd case scenario will it still be require for the bidder to submit the SF-GOOD-15 and SF-GOOD-16? as specified in Sec. 25.3.A.7 or 25.3.B.11: or my guess if its still required for purpose of updating?

First, the financial document required under the eligibility requirement is submission of either NFCC, credit line or CDC, and not a combination of any of the 3 documents.

Second, if credit line or CDC is aready on file with the BAC, I think there is still a need to submit another because the credit line or CDC is project specific. Since the one being bidded out is a new project, the first/original submission may no longer be applicable.
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: Misplaced Document

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Wed Jun 10, 2009 7:01 pm

engrjhez wrote:The question now is, does the insertion of bid prices in the eligibility envelope constitutes a violation? where in fact a bid price is independently found in the financial envelope later?

->Sec.9.3 of PBD only stated what to expect from bidders as to completeness;

->Sec.17.7.1 of the IRR-A only reminds us of the self examination of bids;

The real argument is that, provided all documents of the required envelopes contained all the necessary documents, does the excess document in the eligibility envelope is a ground for INELIGIBILITY? Twisted Evil [/justify][/color]

If I were the BAC, during the opening of the eligibility envelope, if it contains a financial proposal, I will initially rule the bidder as disqualified "for deliberately trying to influence the decision of the BAC by showing its bid price" in the eligibility envelope.

I will wait for the bidder to submit a Motion for Reconsideration and see his justification. My final ruling will depend on how the BAC will appreciate the bidder's justification.
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: Misplaced Document

Post by engrjhez® on Thu Jun 11, 2009 10:09 am

RDV wrote:
engrjhez wrote:The question now is, does the insertion of bid prices in the eligibility envelope constitutes a violation? where in fact a bid price is independently found in the financial envelope later?

->Sec.9.3 of PBD only stated what to expect from bidders as to completeness;

->Sec.17.7.1 of the IRR-A only reminds us of the self examination of bids;

The real argument is that, provided all documents of the required envelopes contained all the necessary documents, does the excess document in the eligibility envelope is a ground for INELIGIBILITY? Twisted Evil [/justify][/color]

If I were the BAC, during the opening of the eligibility envelope, if it contains a financial proposal, I will initially rule the bidder as disqualified "for deliberately trying to influence the decision of the BAC by showing its bid price" in the eligibility envelope.

I will wait for the bidder to submit a Motion for Reconsideration and see his justification. My final ruling will depend on how the BAC will appreciate the bidder's justification.
Thanks RDV for the insight.

So, there is actually no categorical rule on such situations[?]. This is a bit confusing to others because the eligibility check should be non-discretionary. By the presence of a "foreign object" on the eligibility envelope, and ruling out a disqualification based on such, isn't it being "discretionary"?

Just asking... Very Happy
avatar
engrjhez®
Grand Master
Grand Master

Male Number of posts : 2481
Age : 39
Company/Agency : City Government of Bacoor [Region IV-A, Province of Cavite]
Occupation/Designation : Office of the City Legal Service (OCLS) / Certified National Trainer - PhilGEPS
Registration date : 2008-10-31

http://www.bacoor.gov.ph

Back to top Go down

Re: Misplaced Document

Post by riddler on Thu Jun 11, 2009 1:08 pm

I would rule it as eneligible, we cannot put a cart in front of the horse. If most bidder would deliberately misplaced documents like that, or any documents to any envelopes, whats the use of the gppb checklist anyway? Maybe, just maybe the GPPB should consider to revise the rules and give way to misplaced documents in any envelope... and everything will be chaotic... Sad Sad
avatar
riddler
Board General
Board General

Male Number of posts : 598
Company/Agency : lgu
Occupation/Designation : endyeenel
Registration date : 2009-03-03

Back to top Go down

Re: Misplaced Document

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Thu Jun 11, 2009 1:45 pm

ruel t. wrote:I would rule it as eneligible, we cannot put a cart in front of the horse. If most bidder would deliberately misplaced documents like that, or any documents to any envelopes, whats the use of the gppb checklist anyway? Maybe, just maybe the GPPB should consider to revise the rules and give way to misplaced documents in any envelope... and everything will be chaotic... Sad Sad

If it was really found out that it was deliberately done, then the decision to disqualify doesn't have to be reconsidered even if an MR has been received. It should stand as it is, as it could be construed to mean directly or indirectly influencing the decision of the BAC. Unfortunately, there is no specific provision in the IRR to immediately disqualify a bidder under the situation, whether done deliberately or not. I could only remember that in the case of consulting services, I think, it provides that the technical proposal shall not contain price proposal.
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: Misplaced Document

Post by riddler on Thu Jun 11, 2009 3:15 pm

RDV wrote:
ruel t. wrote:I would rule it as eneligible, we cannot put a cart in front of the horse. If most bidder would deliberately misplaced documents like that, or any documents to any envelopes, whats the use of the gppb checklist anyway? Maybe, just maybe the GPPB should consider to revise the rules and give way to misplaced documents in any envelope... and everything will be chaotic... Sad Sad

If it was really found out that it was deliberately done, then the decision to disqualify doesn't have to be reconsidered even if an MR has been received. It should stand as it is, as it could be construed to mean directly or indirectly influencing the decision of the BAC. Unfortunately, there is no specific provision in the IRR to immediately disqualify a bidder under the situation, whether done deliberately or not. I could only remember that in the case of consulting services, I think, it provides that the technical proposal shall not contain price proposal.

I understood RDV. If would be really hard to prove if the bidder deliberately done it or just misplaced the document and the silence of the IRR about it. Granting that the financial proposal is misplaced in the Eligibility Documents and assuming that the Eligibility documents are rated as "passed" although there is an excess "financial proposal" in it. Assuming further that upon proceeding the process, the "financial Proposal" is missing in the 3rd Envelope. Do the BAC need to consider the financial proposal found in the Eligibility Envelope? I think NO. The BAC would outrightly fail the Bidder invoking the "pass/fail" criteria since the financial proposal is not inside the 3rd Envelope as instructed in the ITB.
avatar
riddler
Board General
Board General

Male Number of posts : 598
Company/Agency : lgu
Occupation/Designation : endyeenel
Registration date : 2009-03-03

Back to top Go down

Re: Misplaced Document

Post by RDV @ GP3i on Thu Jun 11, 2009 4:05 pm

ruel t. wrote:
I understood RDV. If would be really hard to prove if the bidder deliberately done it or just misplaced the document and the silence of the IRR about it. Granting that the financial proposal is misplaced in the Eligibility Documents and assuming that the Eligibility documents are rated as "passed" although there is an excess "financial proposal" in it. Assuming further that upon proceeding the process, the "financial Proposal" is missing in the 3rd Envelope. Do the BAC need to consider the financial proposal found in the Eligibility Envelope? I think NO. The BAC would outrightly fail the Bidder invoking the "pass/fail" criteria since the financial proposal is not inside the 3rd Envelope as instructed in the ITB.

Maybe, there is really no reason to reconsider the BAC decision to disqualify the bidder, however the bidder is able to justify in his MR the misplaced bid in his eligibility envelope. Laughing
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: Misplaced Document

Post by riddler on Thu Jun 11, 2009 4:38 pm

Hirap din ano? pina confuse ata tayo ni engrjhez ah. Ha ha Ha Smile

Anyway it happened during our Bidding of Goods last week.

The Bidder submitted 3 Eligibility Envelopes (1 Original and 2 Mach Copies) and 1 Financial Envelope. During the proceeding the BAC asked for a Technical Proposal Envelope, the Representative manifested that the Technical proposal is found in the Eligibility Envelope. The BAC did outrightly declare the Bidder as "eneligble" using Clauses 23 & 24 of the ITB, read the "Miranda Rights" for an MR and return all the documents of the Bidder. Case Closed. Smile
avatar
riddler
Board General
Board General

Male Number of posts : 598
Company/Agency : lgu
Occupation/Designation : endyeenel
Registration date : 2009-03-03

Back to top Go down

Re: Misplaced Document

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

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