The contracting authority rejected

parvej64

Incorrect evaluation of offers based on criteria, specifications, additional, unpublished criteria If the award criteria (or the relevant sub-criteria or weightings) set out in the contract notice or the tender specifications were not respected during the evaluation of the offers or unpublished additional award criteria were used in the evaluation, the Beneficiary will have to return % of the funding. If the above-mentioned conditions result in discrimination ((based on unjustified national, regional and local preferences), the financial correction imposed will amount to % of the funding. Insufficient audit trail for contract award.

An insufficient audit trail can be understood in many situations. Refers to the case where the documentation in question is insufficient to justify the award of the contract, resulting in a lack of transparency. This may result in a financial correction of % of the funding photo retouching being imposed . By way of order, the beneficiary must have appropriate documents presenting the course of the entire procedure (e.g. confirming the answer to the questions asked or the publication of the decision in the Competitiveness Database) and confirming the selection of the tenderer.



Refusal to access such documentation will result in a % refund of the funding. Unjustified rejection of abnormally low offers It concerns a situation in which a given offer was abnormally low within a certain percentage range compared to other offers and therefore the offer without first submitting a written inquiry to the interested tenderer requesting detailed information. The second condition is also a situation in which such an inquiry exists, but the contracting authority is unable to prove that it has assessed the answers provided by the interested tenderers. This may result in the imposition of a financial correction equal to % of the funding.