DECISION
OF Cllr Elfan Ap Rees, EXECUTIVE MEMBER for strategic planning, highways, economic development and housing DECISION
OF COUNCILLOR ELFAN AP REES
THE EXECUTIVE MEMBER FOR STRATEGIC PLANNING, HIGHWAYS, economic Development and housing.
WITH ADVICE FROM
THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT
DECISION No. 16/17 DE314
SUBJECT: Award of Contracts for the provision of Fleet Vehicle Servicing and Maintenance.
Background:
The council currently has a fleet of nearly 100 vehicles and there is an ongoing requirement for the routine maintenance, servicing and MOT testing of this fleet. This provision is provided under contract and the current contract arrangements have now come to an end.
To replace the contract arrangements a tender process has been carried out in compliance with the Public Procurement Regulations.
Decision:
That Autoserv Car and Bike Limited be awarded
Lot A – Cars at an indicative annual contract value of £12,611
Lot B – LGV’s at an indicative annual contract value of £3,834
That RA & LC Hopkins T/A Weston Recovery Services be awarded.
Lot C – HGV’s at an indicative annual contract value of £3,049
Lot D – PCV’s at an indicative annual contract value of £18,725
Lot E – Electric Vehicles at an indicative annual contract value of £4,737
All contracts to be for an initial term of four years with the option for a further extension(s) of up to a further three years.
Reasons:
The contract was tendered as five separate lots with bidders being able to bid for 1 or more lots.
- Lot A – Cars
- Lot B – Light Good Vehicles
- Lot C – Heavy Good Vehicles
- Lot D – Passenger Carrying Vehicles
- Lot E – Electric Vehicles
By dividing into separate lots it was the expectation that this will give more opportunity for small to medium businesses to compete for the work, increase local opportunity and increase competition.
Four submission were received, but one was incomplete and was therefore excluded from further evaluation. Bids were assessed on the basis of 40% quality and 60% price.
A summary of the evaluation results are included in the Appendix.
Other Alternatives Considered:
Consideration was given in respect of the number of bids received and whether sufficient competition had been obtained. The opportunity was advertised through the council’s and national contract opportunity portals and was supported by leaflets distributed to a number of motor factors. Whilst only four submissions were received 21 companies had registered an interest in the opportunity on the council’s procurement website. Due to the nature of the workthe service needs to be delivered within the local area andit is considered that the overall size of this potential market is likely to be limited. The rates obtained are considered to represent good value for money especially in comparison with main dealer rates.
Risk Assessment:
As with all contracts there is a risk of contractor failure. However by awarding the lots to two suppliers this provides a level of resilience in that if one of the suppliers was unable to provide the services required under the contract the council could consider using the other supplier as a short term measurer.
Financial Implications:
The evaluated annual expenditure under each lot is
Lot A – Cars £12,611
Lot B – LGV’s £3,834
Lot C – HGV’s £3,049
Lot D – PCV’s £18,725
Lot E – Electric Vehicles £4,737
The evaluated expenditure levels are indicative, actual expenditure will vary with changes in the composition of the council’sfleetand the amount of servicing and maintenance work actually required.
Costs are recovered through internal recharging to user departments.It is considered that costs can be contained within existing budget levels, especially with the anticipated replacement of vehicles to fully electric over the next few years.
Implications for Future Years:
The contract value may fluctuate over the contract duration due to changes in the numbers of vehicles in the fleet and the amount of work required, however it is expected that overall there will not be a significant changes in value.
SIGNATORIES:
DECISION MAKER:
Signed: ......
Title: ………………………………………
Date: ......
WITH ADVICE FROM:
Signed: ......
Title: ………………………………………
Date: ......
Signed...... The Executive Member for Strategic Planning, Highways, Economic Development and Housing
Dated……………………………………….
Confirmation of Advice Given
Signed...... Director of Development & Environment
Dated………………………………………
Appendix
Summary of Tender Evaluation Results
Lot A CARSPrice and Quality Score / Autoserv / Bid 2 / Bid 3
Tender Evaluation Price / £12,611 / £15,305 / £19,898
Lowest Bid received / £12,611
% Higher then lowest / 0.00% / 21.36% / 57.78%
Price Score (1% for 1%) / 60.00 / 47.18 / 25.33
Quality Score / 28.50 / 38.75 / 35.75
TOTAL SCORE
(Price and Quality) / 88.50 / 85.93 / 61.08
Ranking / 1 / 2 / 3
Most Economically Advantageous Tender / Autoserv
Lot B LGV's
Price and Quality Score / Autoserv / Bid 2 / Bid 3
Tender Evaluation Price / £3,834 / £4,539 / £5,650
Lowest Bid received / £3,834
% Higher then lowest / 0.00% / 18.37% / 47.35%
Price Score (1% for 1%) / 60.00 / 48.98 / 31.59
Quality Score / 28.50 / 38.75 / 35.75
TOTAL SCORE
(Price and Quality) / 88.50 / 87.73 / 67.34
Ranking / 1 / 2 / 3
Most Economically Advantageous Tender / Autoserv
Lot C HGV
Price and Quality Score / Weston / Bid 2 / Bid 3
Tender Evaluation Price / £3,049 / No Bid / No Bid
Lowest Bid received / £3,049
% Higher then lowest / 0.00%
Price Score (1% for 1%) / 60.00
Quality Score / 38.75
TOTAL SCORE
(Price and Quality) / 98.75
Ranking / 1
Most Economically Advantageous Tender / Weston
Lot D PCV's
Price and Quality Score / Weston / Bid 2 / Bid 3
Tender Evaluation Price / £18,725 / £17,174 / £22,140
Lowest Bid received / £17,174
% Higher then lowest / 9.03% / 0.00% / 28.91%
Price Score (1% for 1%) / 54.58 / 60.00 / 42.65
Quality Score / 38.75 / 28.50 / 35.75
TOTAL SCORE
(Price and Quality) / 93.33 / 88.50 / 78.40
Ranking / 1 / 2 / 3
Most Economically Advantageous Tender / Weston
Lot E Electric
Price and Quality Score / Weston / Bid 2 / Bid 3
Tender Evaluation Price / £4,737 / £6,087 / No Bid
Lowest Bid received / £4,737
% Higher then lowest / 0.00% / 28.51%
Price Score (1% for 1%) / 60.00 / 42.90
Quality Score / 38.75 / 35.75
TOTAL SCORE
(Price and Quality) / 98.75 / 78.65
Ranking / 1 / 2
Most Economically Advantageous Tender / Weston
1