Visit Newquay Website Design and Build (Revised)

This tender is a re-issue due to previous technical issues, which is a positive step towards fairness, but critical documents remain inaccessible, severely impacting clarity, completeness, and overall fairness. The absence of evaluation criteria is a major concern.

The Council's re-issuance of the tender demonstrates an attempt to rectify prior procedural errors and ensure fairness. The procedure type and CPV code are correctly defined. However, the inaccessibility of critical documents and the lack of explicitly stated mandatory exclusion grounds raise concerns regarding full compliance with transparency and equal treatment principles.

While the reason for the re-issue is clearly articulated, the actual tender requirements, detailed specifications, and evaluation criteria are largely unknown or inaccessible due to missing documents. This makes it extremely difficult for potential suppliers to understand what is required.

Despite the presence of basic administrative information (title, reference, organization, value, deadlines), the tender is critically incomplete. Many essential documents, such as the detailed specification, mandatory submission forms, and the official PDF version, are inaccessible.

The inaccessibility of critical tender documents and the complete absence of specified evaluation criteria fundamentally undermine fairness and equal treatment among potential bidders. While the re-issue aims to correct past issues, the current state of the tender remains highly unfair.

While electronic submission via email is supported and the contract start date/duration are known, the inability to access essential documents (like the detailed specification and submission forms) makes it practically impossible for suppliers to prepare a compliant and competitive bid.

Basic administrative data fields are populated and generally consistent. However, there are significant inconsistencies between the tender description/AI summaries and automated checks regarding document availability and the e-submission method. The re-issue itself points to prior procedural inconsistencies.

The tender does not explicitly mention any green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. It is also not indicated as EU funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards.