Issue - meetings
Gateway 3 Contract Award: Bailiff Services
Meeting: 30/11/2010 - Cabinet (Item 150)
150 Gateway 3 Contract Award: Bailiff Services 
PDF 217 KB
Minutes:
This report set out the outcome of the procurement process to secure two year contracts for bailiff services with an option for a two year extension.
The contracts would include the recovery of council tax, national non-domestic rates, housing benefit overpayments, parking fines and sundry debts.
An exempt appendix set out a summary of the award of contract from initial expression of interest to the contract award including tender evaluation.
It was noted that the Procurement Board had considered this report on 10 November 2010 and referred the matter to Cabinet for approval.
|
Decision number: |
Decision: |
|
212/2010 |
The Cabinet agreed that: a) the Revenues & Benefits services will be allocated into two parcels of work on a geographical basis (one parcel to include Chatham and Rochester, with the other parcel including Gillingham, Strood and the parishes) whilst work for Parking Services will be allocated on a 50/50 basis. b) for the Revenues and Benefits service the contracts be awarded to Rundles and Co and Chandlers Ltd as these two companies submitted the most economically advantageous tenders for this service and received the two highest scores. c) for the Parking services the contracts be awarded to Newlyns Ltd and Loxstock Ltd T/A Davies Enforcement as these two companies submitted the most economically advantageous tenders for this service and received the two highest scores. d) the contract term for all contracts is to be two years with an option to extend for a further two years subject to satisfactory performance and to the current terms and conditions of contract. |
Reasons:
The procurement process identified that bailiff services for Revenues and Benefits required different skills to those needed for parking services and as such different contractors are needed for these services.
The ability to monitor and benchmark performance is a key requirement to a service that is both critical to the Council’s cash flow but also highly visible and potentially a risk to the Council’s reputation.
In accordance with the published evaluation criteria, the contractors submitted the most economically advantageous tenders for the specified services.