Maintence of MPS vehicles

JavaScript is not enabled

Without JavaScript enabled forms will not work.

Freedom of information request reference no: 01.FOI.24.039379

I note you seek access to the following information:

I would be most grateful if you would provide me, details in respect to the contract below.

FOR THE PROVISION OF SERVICE, CALIBRATION & REPAIR OF MPS VEHICLE WORKSHOP PLANT, EQUIPMENT & TOOLS.

The details we require are:

What are the contractual performance KPI's for this contract?
Please advise the incumbent's performance on this contract?
Suppliers who applied for inclusion on each framework/contract and were successful & not successful at the PQQ & ITT stages.
Actual spend on this contract/framework (and any sub lots), from the start of the contract to the current date.
Start date & duration of framework/contract?
Could you please provide a copy of the service/product specification given to all bidders for when this contract was last advertised?
Is there an extension clause in the framework(s)/contract(s) and, if so, the duration of the extension?
Has a decision been made yet on whether the framework(s)/contract(s) are being either extended or renewed?
Who is the senior officer (outside of procurement) responsible for this contract?

Decision

I have today decided to disclose some of the requested information. Some data has been withheld as it is exempt from disclosure and therefore this response serves as a Refusal Notice under Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) by virtue of the following exemptions:

Section 43(2) – Commercial Interests

Reason for decision

Section 43(2) – Commercial Interests - Disclosure of some of the information you have requested would impact on future tender processes by weakening the MPS' position in a competitive market. In these times of budget cuts, it is particularly pertinent for the MPS to achieve value for money for the public purse. The MPS would not be in the best bargaining position to achieve this if through disclosures under the Act, the competitive nature of the tendering for contract process is adversely affected.

A Freedom of Information Act request is not a private transaction. Both the request itself, and any information disclosed, are considered suitable for open publication. This is because, under the Act, any information disclosed is released into the wider public domain, effectively to the world, not just to an individual. Whilst not questioning the motives of an applicant any information disclosed in relation to this request could be of use to those who seek to detrimentally impact our relationships with our suppliers.

The requested information relates to contracts and tenders for the provision of service, calibration and repair of PS vehicle workshop, plant, equipment, and tools. The end date of this contract is next year. The MPS has exempted some of the information requested above as disclosure would likely negatively impact future processes for this contract. Disclosing detailed information about the performance of a contractor could negatively impact them. Our suppliers do not have the expectation that this information will be shared with competing companies. By disclosing this information under the Act, it becomes public and thereby could be used by competitors to give them an unfair advantage when tendering for contracts and would affect our contractors’ ability to engage in a competitive manner within the marketplace.

Similarly, if we disclose details of ‘service/product specification given to all bidders for when this contract was last advertised’, this may provide a strategic advantage to a potential supplier in that they would have been provided with procurement information before any official contract notices had been published to the market.

As mentioned, disclosure of the requested information in full would be harmful to the commercial interests of the MPS as this would prove detrimental to the relationship between the MPS and our suppliers and as a result damage the bargaining position of the MPS. This may in turn impact the procurement of similar services in the future, as companies would be less willing to share details with the MPS through fear of disclosure under the Act.

As the ICO Freedom of Information Awareness Guidance states, "there is a public interest in ensuring that companies are able to compete fairly". The level of competition within the procurement process would be directly affected by the release of the requested information in full.

It is not in the public interest for the relationship between the MPS and suppliers to be negatively affected. This is because harm to, or termination of, these relationships may result in the MPS being unable to procure our preferred choice of services, which we require to facilitate effective policing. If our current suppliers terminate their relationship with the MPS, we would have to seek out new suppliers and renegotiate terms. By narrowing the range of contractors that will supply to us, we would restrict our access to certain good and services, and it may force us to use less preferable suppliers. This could subsequently lead to us having to procure less suitable services or utilise public funds in a less efficient manner.

Whilst there is a public interest in the transparency of policing resources and providing reassurance that the MPS is appropriately and effectively procuring equipment and services, there is also a strong public interest in knowing that policing activity with regard to the delivery of law enforcement is operationally effective.

With regard to commercial interest, we have considered whether the public interest lies in favour of releasing the requested information into the public domain or whether there is sufficient reason to support withholding the requested information. Having considered your request and having examined the associated risk in release, we have found there is a risk to the commercial interests of the MPS and our suppliers.

I consider that the benefit that would result from the information being disclosed does not outweigh the considerations favouring non-disclosure.

Disclosure

Q1 - What are the contractual performance KPI's for this contract?

A detailed response to this request would be commercially sensitive and therefore exempt from disclosure by virtue of Section 43 of FOIA. Please see below for further explanation. However, as a gesture of goodwill and outside of the Freedom of Information Act, we can advise the areas measured but not limited to. These include:

Management Information (MI)
Costs
Quality on Parts
Complaints

Q2 - Please advise the incumbent's performance on this contract?

Q3 - Suppliers who applied for inclusion on each framework/contract and were successful & not successful at the PQQ & ITT stages.

Please refer to the Find A Tender notice reference 2021/S 000-025254 for details on awarded supplier and number of bids received. (Only one bid received).

Q4 - Actual spend on this contract/framework (and any sub lots), from the start of the contract to the current date.

Purchase Order commitment: £508,000. Spend amounts are published and can be accessed from our website:

Published Items

Q5 - Start date & duration of framework/contract?

From 01 October 2021 to 30 September 2025

Q6 - Could you please provide a copy of the service/product specification given to all bidders for when this contract was last advertised?

This information is commercially sensitive and therefore refused by virtue of Section 43 of FOIA. Please see below for further explanation.

Q7 - Is there an extension clause in the framework(s)/contract(s) and, if so, the duration of the extension?

The duration of the extension is 12 months.

Q8 - Has a decision been made yet on whether the framework(s)/contract(s) are being either extended or renewed?

The foreseen extension option has been taken up.

Q9 - Who is the senior officer (outside of procurement) responsible for this contract?

**** **** – Deputy Director Operational Support Services – Fleet Services

Cookies

Maintence of MPS vehicles

Decision