Lyme Countryside Park Phase 1 Habitat Assessment

This tender for a habitat assessment is hampered by significant documentation issues, including a failed download of the Tender Notice and missing evaluation criteria, severely impacting its transparency and fairness.

The failed download of the 'Tender Notice' and the 'Official PDF Version' being marked as 'Required: No' are critical issues affecting legal compliance and transparency. While the procedure type and CPV code are clear, the absence of explicit mandatory exclusion, eligibility, and financial requirements in the provided summary is a weakness.

The project description and technical requirements are clear. However, the complete absence of specified evaluation criteria is a major clarity flaw. The lack of detailed mandatory exclusion, eligibility, and financial requirements also reduces overall clarity for potential bidders.

While basic information, value, and timelines are present, the tender is incomplete due to the critical absence of evaluation criteria. The failed download of the 'Tender Notice' and the 'Official PDF Version' being marked as 'Required: No' also indicate significant gaps in accessible documentation.

Fairness is severely compromised by the lack of full document access (failed download, 'Required: No' for technical specs), the complete absence of evaluation criteria, and the lack of electronic submission. While requirements appear generic, these procedural deficiencies create an uneven playing field.

The absence of electronic submission is a significant practical drawback in modern procurement. Furthermore, the issues with document access (failed download, 'Required: No' for technical specifications) hinder practical engagement for bidders. Contract start and duration are clear.

Most key fields are populated, and dates are logical. Minor inconsistencies include missing 'Liable Person' and 'Code' fields for Type/Procedure. There are no reported disputes or suspensions.

The tender does not include any explicit green procurement, social, or innovation criteria, nor is it identified as EU-funded, indicating a lack of focus on sustainability aspects.