Competing bidder JS Maritime Partners cries foul over tender conditions it says are designed to shut it out.
Marine management company JS Maritime Partners has filed an urgent application in the Cape High Court to stop the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DFFE) from awarding a tender for the management of the state-owned SA Agulhas II and Algoa vessels on the grounds that it is tailor-made for the incumbent, Amsol.
The DFFE says it will oppose the application.
Captain Stefan Bulow, CEO of JS Maritime, states: “We have brought this application on an urgent basis because we believe the tender is tailor-made for the incumbent and designed to eliminate competing bids.”
The bid closed on 23 May.
ALSO READ: ‘New site for tender fraud’: EFF wary of SA’s new petrol company
Necessary information
A tender briefing was held on 23 April in Cape Town with several bidders in attendance – among them JS Maritime Partners and Amsol.
During the tender briefing, Bulow asked for information that only the incumbent operator would know, such as the insurance claims history and historical true spend on the ship, but says while the department has responded, the answers given are unsatisfactory and illogical.
JS Maritime, an international shipping company based in Cape Town, has teamed up with HF Offshore, together operating 22 vessels, and with the local Khoisan Consortium to bid for ship management and consulting contracts in SA.
“All we are asking for is a level playing field,” says Bulow.
“From the way the tender is designed, it is clear that there can only be one outcome, and that is to the benefit of Amsol. We have asked the DFFE for answers to a number of questions that are vital to our ability to submit a comprehensive and accurate tender, but the requests were declined on the basis that bidders must estimate and provide assumptions, which is illogical.
“So, unfortunately, we have to take this matter to court and seek an urgent interdict to stop the tender going ahead as it is currently structured.”
ALSO READ: Sanral suspends R1.57bn contract award pending an investigation
The information it requested from the DFFE:
- The insurance claims history of the SA Agulahs II and the Algoa, which is essential in determining insurance premiums;
- The current insured values of the two vessels and their tonnage specifications;
- The historical costs of operating the vessels, which only Amsol would know;
- Clarification on the meaning of various cost codes in the tender documents;
- Daily charter rates, number of charters, and crew size;
- Fuel rates; and
- Costs for drydocking and maintenance.
“The current service provider, Amsol, has access to all such information,” Julio Sieni of Dirk Kotze Attorneys for JS Maritime wrote to the DFFE.
“Were this not the case, it would be unable to perform. Thus, not to share this information with other potential bidders would be grossly irregular and blatantly unfair and would fall foul of all legislation pertaining to this type of tender process.”
The lack of response for specific information from the DFFE to questions is troubling, says Bulow.
ALSO READ: SCA finds defence department’s R60 million tender invalid and unlawful
No response for Moneyweb either
Moneyweb approached Amsol for comment and was referred to the DFFE.
The DFFE promised to reply to Moneyweb’s questions a week ago but had not done so at the time of publication.
What is clear, however, is that it intends opposing JS Maritime’s application.
Other irregularities
There are a number of other irregularities in the tender document highlighted by JS Maritime. For example, the requirement that the tenderer must have had the required facilities and premises for more than eight years in order to achieve maximum points.
This is illogical, says Bulow, and seems to have been inserted to benefit the incumbent rather than someone else with more suitable and modern premises that are not eight years old.
Sieni says the failure of the DFFE to provide the requested information to complete the tender application – information that is crucial to completing the tender document – and its silence on the request to extend the tender closing date, leaves it with no option but to approach the Western Cape High Court for an urgent interdict.
This article was republished from Moneyweb. Read the original here.
