Rental of mobile road traffic violation recording equipment for the needs of Daugavpils Municipal Police

The overall quality of this tender is moderate, with clear description and open procedure as strengths, but significant concerns regarding restricted document access and undisclosed estimated value.

The tender defines an open procedure and provides a reasonable submission deadline. CPV codes appear appropriate, and no disputes are noted. However, the estimated value is not disclosed, and the summary lacks explicit detail on mandatory exclusion grounds, which are crucial for full legal compliance.

The tender's description is clear, and requirements are well-documented by referring to specific tender documents. Performance conditions are also clearly stated by reference. While evaluation criteria ('lowest price') are specified in one document, the automated flag 'Missing evaluation criteria' suggests they might not be optimally prominent, slightly impacting overall clarity.

Basic information, deadlines, duration, and location are all provided. Requirements and criteria are defined by reference to attached documents. However, the estimated contract value is not disclosed, which is a significant omission impacting the completeness of essential tender information.

The open procedure and objective 'lowest price' evaluation criteria are positive for fairness. However, the flagged 'Restricted document access' and 'Value not disclosed' are major impediments to fair competition and transparency. The contradiction between 'E-Procurement' and 'No e-submission' also negatively impacts equal access for bidders.

The tender's practicality is significantly hampered by the flagged 'No e-submission' and 'Restricted document access', creating substantial barriers for potential bidders. The absence of a specific contract start date and detailed financing information further reduces practicality.

Dates are logical and consistent. However, there are significant contradictions, notably between the 'E-Procurement' characteristic and the 'No e-submission' and 'Restricted document access' flags. The missing 'Estimated Value' and the 'Missing evaluation criteria' flag (despite being in a document) also indicate inconsistencies in data presentation.

The tender does not include any explicit criteria or focus on green procurement, social aspects, or innovation. It is also not EU funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards.