Summary of Rejections and Disqualifications

Thread Content

Summary of Rejections and Disqualification of Proposals: At the bid opening and evaluation site, it is common for projects to be disqualified due to suppliers’ proposals being rejected or deemed invalid. During the bid opening phase, the main reasons for rejecting a supplier’s bid document are as follows: First, the legal representative who submits the bid document or their authorized representative fails to bring an ID card, or fails to provide valid proof of social insurance payments as required by the bidding documents. Regarding the verification of the identity of the supplier’s authorized representative, tender documents usually require that proof of the legal representative’s identity and a power of attorney be provided in the bid documents or at the time of submission. Before the bid opening, an ID card is required for verification (and in some projects, proof of social insurance payments is also required). However, some suppliers fail to bring their ID cards due to negligence, or the documents they provide are invalid, which results in their bid documents being rejected. Second, the supplier was late for some reason. In practice, it is common for suppliers to rush to the bidding site with their bids just after the bidding deadline. In accordance with Article 38 of the **Procedures for Bidding and Tendering in the Procurement of Goods and Services**, the opening of bids shall be conducted publicly at the same time as the deadline specified in the bidding documents for submitting bids. In line with the principles of openness, fairness, impartiality, and integrity in procurement, any bid submitted after the deadline will be deemed invalid. Third, the supplier submits the bid documents under a different company name. The name of the entity submitting the bid differs from the name of the entity that registered to purchase the tender documents, and this was not communicated in advance to the procurement agency. Many tender documents require the tenderer to purchase them and register them, and some suppliers assume that simply by purchasing the tender documents they can bid under any entity or agency name they choose. In fact, the name of the entity submitting the bid at the bid opening must be identical to that used during registration; if there is any change, it must be notified to the procurement agency before the deadline for purchasing the tender documents, or a certificate confirming the change in the entity’s name must be obtained from the industrial and commercial authorities. Fourth, other circumstances. If the sealing of the supplier’s bid documents does not meet the requirements, the procurement agency should check the sealing of the bid documents upon receipt, and if any issues are found, it should inform the supplier promptly so that they can rectify this defect on site ； The supplier’s deposit payment does not meet the requirements; for example, it may not have been deposited into the designated account, or the name of the entity on the deposit receipt submitted in person may not match the supplier’s name. During the bid evaluation phase, the evaluation committee considers a bid document to be invalid in the following main situations: First, the submitted business license is invalid. If the scope of business specified in the business license does not cover the items to be purchased as stipulated in the tender documents, or if the tender documents require that suppliers have the status of independent legal entities, yet the business license provided by the supplier is one for an individual business operator, etc. Second, in cases where the tender documents require a quality inspection report, the supplier fails to provide one, the deadline specified for submitting such a report is not met, the test values of the technical parameters stated in the report deviate from those specified in the tender documents, or the quality inspection report does not correspond to the product submitted. Third, the authorization letter from the manufacturer granted to the agent for this project is invalid when the agent submits a bid. Such as when the seal affixed by the manufacturer is a contract-specific seal or a sales department seal, or when the bid product does not match the authorization letter. Fourth, incomplete qualification documents result in failure in the qualification review. Fifth, the signing of the bid documents does not meet the requirements. If the agent authorized by the legal representative does not sign or seal it ； The cover page of the project bidding document’s quotation lacks the signature and official seal from the cost estimator. Sixth, the bid documents contain significant deviations that result in a failure to meet the requirements of the tender documents in essence. If the delivery period, warranty period, and payment terms do not meet the requirements specified in the tender documents ； The technical solutions and specification standards do not meet the requirements ； The detailed specifications and technical parameters of the equipment were not provided as required in the tender documents, or the technical requirements from those documents were not copied, which prevented the evaluation committee from carrying out a comparison and assessment ； Issues such as discrepancies between the capitalized amounts in the bid opening schedule and the summary of detailed quotes. Seventh, in cases where samples are required, the samples provided by the supplier are incomplete, or their quality and specifications clearly do not match those of the products specified in the tender documents. Eighth, suppliers do not have a sufficient understanding of the current **procurement policies. If the tender documents require that the products to be purchased fall within the scope of **mandatory procurement of energy-saving products**, then the products submitted by the bidder must be included in the list of energy-saving products that are subject to mandatory procurement as per the latest \"List of Energy-Saving Products for Procurement\"; otherwise, their bid will be rejected ； In construction projects, this includes situations where the bidder’s quoted rate per labor day for the project work is lower than the standard set by the competent administrative authorities, where the fees related to regulations and safe and civilized construction are not calculated using the new rate standards, or where provisional amounts such as reserves are not included in the bid price or do not conform to the requirements specified in the tender documents. Furthermore, there are also suppliers who cause projects to be rejected due to bid rigging, such as unusually identical bid documents or regular differences in bid prices. When a project bid is rejected, it is often necessary to issue a new announcement and organize the bidding process again, which undoubtedly results in significant waste of human resources, materials, and time for the purchaser, suppliers, procurement agencies, and other parties involved. As purchasers and staff of procurement agencies, it is necessary to avoid such situations from occurring. First, the preparation of tender documents must be standardized and accurate; standards should not be increased arbitrarily. For goods-related projects, the technical parameters specified in the tender documents should not be tailored to specific needs, and the qualification, technical, and commercial requirements should correspond to the actual demands. The tender documents should clearly list the qualification documents in bold font to serve as a clear indication to suppliers. Furthermore, it is advisable to include the phrase “Bidder’s Notes” in the preamble of the tender documents, to remind suppliers to carefully examine their qualification documents and pay attention to any significant deviations specified in the tender documents. Second, during the supplier registration phase, for projects with a small number of potential suppliers and insufficient competition, suppliers should be required to submit copies of relevant qualification documents at the time of registration. This approach is not intended to restrict suppliers from applying, but rather to conduct a preliminary review of their qualification documents in advance; if there are any issues with these documents or they do not meet the requirements, the personnel responsible for handling applications should inform the suppliers promptly. Third, anticipate situations that could lead to the rejection of bids, and communicate with the registered suppliers one or two days before the bid opening, asking them to conduct self-inspections. Such as verifying the payment of the deposit and confirming the supplier’s name, etc. Fourth, during the evaluation phase, it is necessary to require the evaluation experts to treat all suppliers equally, in an objective and fair manner, and to strictly adhere to the evaluation criteria specified in the tender documents; no differential or discriminatory treatment should be given to any supplier. If a supplier’s bid document is found to be invalid upon review, the supplier should be informed promptly, with the reasons explained in a way that satisfies them, so as to avoid doubts and complaints. This also helps the supplier learn from the experience and prevent similar situations from occurring in the future.