Court in Mykolaiv canceled a tender agreement worth 15 million

In Mykolaiv, the auditors succeeded in canceling a contract worth almost UAH 15 million. It was found that the customer had illegally selected the winner of the tender.

This was reported by the press service of the Southern Office of the State Audit Service in Mykolaiv region.

During the monitoring of the procurement procedure, it was found that the offer chosen by the customer did not comply with the tender documentation.

In particular, the participant who was recognized as the winner designated information about his experience in fulfilling similar contracts as confidential, which is contrary to current legislation. In addition, its proposal did not meet the requirements for equipment, material and technical facilities and technologies. No documents on the availability of the necessary vehicles were provided.

Despite these violations, the procuring entity entered into a contract worth UAH 14 million 877 thousand with this bidder.

The auditors obliged the Infrastructure Department of Mykolaiv Regional State Administration to cancel the contract. However, the contracting authority tried to challenge the auditors' findings in court. The Mykolaiv District Administrative Court found the customer's claims unfounded and dismissed the lawsuit.

Since the beginning of 2024, 7 court decisions have been made in favor of Mykolaiv auditors totaling almost UAH 20 million.

Recently, the Mykolaiv region terminated a contract with a Belarusian company for the supply of trolleybuses worth almost UAH 167 million. The termination of the contract and the return of the advance payment from BCM-Ukraine LLC made it possible to conclude a new contract for the purchase of 31 Ukrainian-made trolleybuses, which is 50% more than the previous contract.

In Odesa, the winner of a 32-million-dollar tender to restore a damaged building was rejected. Stikon Limited Liability Company, which was considered as a possible contractor based on the results of the previous procurement, did not provide information on the security of the tender proposal, namely the availability of a bank guarantee, so its proposal was rejected.

Earlier, the Infrastructure Restoration and Development Service canceled a two billion hryvnia tender for the construction of a Japanese bridge interchange. This was the second attempt to find a contractor to build the interchange to the bridge. The reason for canceling the tender was that there was no need to purchase goods, works, and services.

Анна Бальчінос