CSI attempt: nParks Brompton procurement process ended up with a dodgy winning bidder!

[pewpewchiu~]

bumppppppp

 

[HarmanK]

my gut feel to this saga - nparks has surplus budget to spend and knowing that FY 2011/12 is ending, they need to find ways to spend. Thus the gebiz is posted after CNY. Do you all think nparks will recall the ITQ when only one quote is submitted? Yes they will if time is on their side. No they wont as they need to spend the budget, factoring in the time to deliver and e-invoice. Tell me, how many nparks officers will actually ride the bike doing their patrol? let's monitor it... Well, if smrt allows segway on the train, I think nparks will go for segway instead, to make sure all budget spent ??

 

[Ohayo!]

they just need to say something

then sinkie will LLST.

like how they said that they need to maintain dignity for high pay

crap excuse also they force it down our throat and nobody talk abt it now

 

[Arsenal85]

something is fishy lar

50bux off retail price

knn where got any pple bid for tender win with only 50bux off retail price

pple bid for tender for special cost support from the disty or principal directly lor

oh and the best part is even the disty is not informed

 

[Greysky]

Last nite's news bulletin (2130 English and 2200 Chinese) also touched on the issue.

So-called expert.

Talk so much ... so much evidence that something is fishy but nobody wants to start an inquiry or an investigation yet.

 

[snap99]

dunno why they interview academics ......

 

[PeacefulNemesis]

while twinkle often trolls, I have to say he probably isn't for this one. How many tenders have you read through on GeBiz? Somebody asked why on earth does a bicycle purchase need a 14 page document. After reading a few in a previous job, I can say that in some cases many companies won't even be able to bid despite the common nature of the items and even if they can, it is obvious they won't be able to give the best price.

Go think about it bro.

Don't be misled by him. I had never said that the 14 page document is sensible. In fact, I don't. Where I'm coming from is that had they sought to get more than 1 bidder, but could only get 1, they would have called up other companies to enquire why are they not bidding, and they'd review their tender document and all these would not have happened. Even they acknowledged that they should not have gone ahead with just 1 bidder.

What if the 1 and only bidder quoted way above market price? Should they then take it since it's the only bidder? Or if there is no bidder at all should they just give up the whole idea? Common sense would say that they'll call up other companies for RFP and be more flexible about their tender requirements.

What is pointed out is the error in the tender itself. It is just fighting the fire. I am going further backwards in their internal control which will minimize more of such cases in the future.

 

[pale]

Dun complain anymore plz. If not they will start raising the salary of ppl involved so as to oppose corruption.

 

[Singaporean1st]

[NEW] EXTRA CSI Attempt -NParks Brompton procurement process ended up with a dodgy winning bidder?

Ministry Of Finance

Government Procurement

All Government Procuring Entities (GPEs), that is, Ministries, Departments, Organs of State and Statutory Boards, acquiring goods, services and construction services either for their own use or on behalf of another GPEs are to work within this Government Procurement (GP) framework.
Our key principles governing GP are as follows:

(a) Transparency
We subscribe to an open and transparent procurement regime across all stages of the procurement lifecycle. The government's procurement procedures and evaluation criteria for each procurement are made known to suppliers.

(b) Open and Fair Competition
An open and competitive environment will encourage suppliers to give their best offers. Suppliers are given equitable access opportunities and compete on a level playing field.

(c) Value for Money
Government will procure from sources that can best meet its requirements and which offer the best value. Value for money is derived from the optimal balance of benefits and costs on the basis of total cost of ownership. As such, value for money does not necessarily mean that a tender must be awarded to the lowest bidder.

Ministry Of Finance - Our Policies



-------------------

[UPDATE 3] 16th July 2012 9:00am


Hello all Singapore tax payers,


Good morning, and thanks for tuning in.

This is going to be a long story, and believe me… i've already tried my best to cut it as short as possible.

There are so many new intertwined details that i do not even know how is the best way to begin presenting them so that you can digest it smoothly, but at the end of the day, you will find that this whole finding is actually very simple and yet shocking, which will lead to more questions to be directed to the relevant parties- This i guarantee you. For those who can't grasp the whole 'story' please scroll below and read through all the 'Updates' posted before today.

First thing first! i would like to say upfront that i am NOT making any accusation of any criminal wrong doings on anybody's part. Also, i am not anti-government, anti-what-political-party, or anti-whatever-is-your-face, etc… So for those who might be reposting my stuffs on your own platforms to push your own political agendas or whatever, sorry, i don't endorse you at all.

All that i am publishing, are only questions. Serious questions of accountability, transparency, the rights of the Singapore public to know why and how our tax dollars are being used, wether appropriately or in-appropriately. Questions based on my own findings of facts and details that seem suspicious to me, but again, do not amount to of criminal nature.

Whether these revelations might contain any real smoking-gun or not, i really do not know. And whether if you will find them relevant or not, well, its up to you do your own deduction. And if this leads to any authority to start conducting their own official investigations, then i most certainly will appreciate.

But ultimately, my hope is to help send a vital message across: to everyone, especially to all those have been given responsibility and being placed upon with trust; those conducting official-businesses using precious Singapore's tax-payers money; that you cannot take for granted our trusts, cannot mishandle any public fund wether intentionally or unintentionally and think that you can just walk away with it, without providing full accountability.

Because what you're handling, is not your money. It is our tax-payers'!

--

Ok, now onto the new discoveries.

BikeHop Pte. Ltd.

You all know who the bosses of BikeHop are?

Listed on their website Bikehop - Hop on our bike to explore Singapore! is this old photo with no names of business operator anywhere to be found on the site.

Anyway, they are from Left to right- Mr. Lawrence Lim ChunHow https://www.facebook.com/lawlim1010, Mr. Willie Ong Willie Ong | Facebook, and Mr. Kok How Lim Kok How Lim | Facebook.

The main boss here is Lawrence Lim (Managing Director) 40 yr old.

BikeHop also has a facebook page. BikeHop Singapore | Facebook

We'll come back to that fan page later on.


Now to Mr. Wesley Su Weiqiang. http://www.facebook.com/Wezzzzo

You all should also know by now that he is the NParks 'contact person' for the '26 foldable bicycles' quotation notice ( at Gebiz.gov.sg ( ITQ No.: NPB000ETQ12000033 )

He is also the manager for Park Connector Network (PCN) as listed under Government/MND directory. gov.sg — Directory

Now, as stated before, i find the whole procurement very weird.

1-Shortest quotation period;
2-Very specific specs-requirement list [Please see Update 2 this suspicious list]
3-Closed with only 1 bidder
4-Awarded to a non-authorized dealer. (Instead of a local authorized dealer who could provide 5 years warranty)

i began to wonder if there could be any possibility that this contract was awarded with bias by NParks?

Again, i need to remind you guys that we are not talking about 26 durians here. We are talking about 26 high-end bicycles costing $2,200 each, a total of $57,200 of public fund. This sum of $57.2k, is higher than many Singaporeans' total income for 2 or even 3 years.
Yes, these bicycles could certainly be helpful for NParks officers to better perform their duties, i don't doubt that.
However, what i wish for you to focus on, is that, a large amount of public fund is involved, and for sure nobody can deny this.
Don't lose this focus. And that, all aspects of these type of procurements should be able to stand up to scrutiny, and not just providing the public with some half-answers, half-truths, etc.. when questioned & inquired by the public. Or else, there will be no accountability.

Thus, i began to intensify my check on BikeHop.
Amongst the stuffs i notice while researching about them, i notice one interesting person on BikeHop's facebookpage.
For now lets call him Mystery Guy no.1 alright.
Then as i felt i'm done with checking everything on BikeHop including their details on Bizfile/ACRA etc… I went back checking on Wesley Su.

And in the middle of my research on Mr. Wesley Su, i began to notice the name of the Mystery Guy 1 popping up again.

Gradually, i became aware that in fact this name has been popping up left and right and center, over and over again, in the midst of my investigating the whole NParks-Brompton procurement!

Mystery Guy 1 is in the blogs, Mystery Guy 1 is in the cyclists forums, he is on BikeHop's Facebook friends list, he is on Wesley's FB friends list, he is even on the news paper!!!
Yup, In fact he went as far as submitting both an online letter and a print letter to both the Straits Times print and oline forums, in support of Nparks' procurement of the Brompton brand bicycles.
Well, Mystery Guy 1 is Mr. Woon Taiwoon. https://www.facebook.com/taiwoon

Now, so who is this Woon Taiwoon? Well, after much research, i learnt that he is actually a very prominent leisure cyclist here in Singapore. He has his own cycling blogs.
Participate actively in forums and showing alot of support of NParks.
He is also the founder of a very active bicycle lovers club and conduct cycling gatherings/outings on a regular basis.
http://www.lovecyclingsg.com/ | NParks | Unfold and Cycle | smallwheelsbigsmile.blogspot.com
He is friends with BikeHop owners before January 2012.

I also found proofs that that Mr Woon Taiwoon already knew about Mr Wesley in person before September 2011, in this notice posted on 24th Sept 2011 - Lets Get Active ride by Nparks for the parks festival regarding an invitation from Wesley Su on behalf of NParks for a "Let's Get Active ride" event by NParks.

Interestingly, Woon Taiwoon has also been interviewed on numerous occasion by the news media and NParks on matters such such how to improve the parks and PCN, as apparently, they find him an expert leisure-cyclist.

Thus i began to research more on Mr Woon Taiwoon, and found to my amazement, that he is also a friend of BikeHop director Mr. Lawrence Lim since 2011. Which makes me wonder more if there could be any deeper 'links' between this 3 persons, Lawrence Lim, Taiwoon and Wesley?

But in between, i must explain how i am so sure of establishing that the Wesley Su on the facebook at http://www.facebook.com/Wezzzzo is the Wesley Su from NParks since he did not disclose where he work at on his profile page?
Well, I did my deduction base on the triangulation of his colleague's facebook accounts who prominently state that they are National Parks Board employees, namely, Mr Gabriel Tang Gabriel Tang | Facebook (who has been partnering Wesley on numerous assignments), Mr Mervyn Tan Mervyn Tan | Facebook (who is another manager for NParks PCN), and other National Parks employees such as Cindy Teng http://www.facebook.com/cindy.teng.5036 , Markie Teo http://www.facebook.com/markieteo , Hisham Mustafa http://www.facebook.com/hisham.mustafa.12 etc.. They all have Wesley Su in their FB friends list. Thus, from this i can guarantee that this account belongs to Wesley Su of NParks.

All these Facebook craps might seem trivial. But the reason why i need to make sure of these, is extremely vital. It is to establish the facts and evidences pertaining to who knew who, before the NParks-BikeHop quotation dealings on and from January 2012. All these are electronically time-stamped and logged evidences.

Are they friends only after the deal? Or were they friends and in contact with each other already before the procurement?

All these wonderings and further investigations soon lead me to Mystery Guy no. 2. The last main character that is of high importance related to this whole affair. Why i use the word 'high' is because…. lets talk about this later on.

First, you need to know that this Mystery Guy 2 is so well 'loved' because, again, just like Mystery Guy 1, he is everywhere!

Mystery Guy 2 is in Mr Woon Taiwoon's blog (being interviewed by Woon on 27th December 2011) smallwheelsbigsmile: Rider profile - Bernard Lim ,

He is an active cyclist and a big fan of Brompton bicycles,

He has BikeHop's Fan FB page in is own friends list…

He is friend all 3 BikeHope owners- befriended Lawrence and Willie Ong in 2011 (could be even earlier).

And he is also an employee of…. yes you guess it, National Parks board!

But who exactly is this Mystery Guy no.2 and what's his name and position at NParks?

Woon Taiwoon interviewing Bernard Lim on his Brompton and cyclying passion 27 December 2011
"..but I do ride a Brompton to commute, and trying to ride old steelers (for show only) and to dabble in a few vintage ones (to appreciate craftmanship and heritage). Just bought a BMX from Tiger Tang which I shall now call it TIGER!
• Your favorite cycling kakis
Has to be Albert who introduced me to the Brompton..." Smallwheelsbigsmile: Rider profile - Bernard Lim

Well, he is none other than Mr. Bernard Lim Yong Soon, NParks Assistant Director, of the Park Connector Network division.
http://www.facebook.com/bernard.ys
Looking at the MND directory, gov.sg — Directory
he is the head of the division and superior of Mr Wesley Su. And he is also the one in-charge of the procurement of the 26 foldable bicycles for NParks, PCN.

Now ladies and gentlemen. Are you aware of the relations now?
Maybe you are still abit lost. I think i better recap for easier understanding:

-BikeHop is owned by Lawrence Lim (and his 2 partners).

-Lawrence Lim is friend with Mr Woon Taiwoon before January 2012. (who is very vocal about NParks having gotten 'A Good Deal' with the Brompton purchases from BikeHop).

-Woon Taiwoon is friend of both Bernard Lim and Wesley Su from NParks.

-Wesley Su is working under instructions from Bernard Lim at Nparks.

-Bernard Lim is a friend of ALL 3 BikerHop owners; Bernard knew Lawrence Lim and Willie Ong before January 2012.

-Friend is friends with friends and friends…. they are all friends and fans of Brompton bikes…!!! ^_^

Bernard Lim, Brompton fan & good friend of BikeHop even before January 2012.

Now you might ask what can one prove, even though there are solid evidences that all these Bompton bike lovers knew each other before the January 2012 procurement?
Well, my answer to you is, i can't prove anything else beyond this fact.
Because i am not someone who is able to conduct checks into people's email, sms, phone call logs, or even bank transactions. I'm not superman.
Maybe only some people with power can.

Anyway, let's break it all down even simpler for you:

Assistant Director Mr. Bernard Lim of National Parks Board PCN,
is already a big fan of Brompton brand foldable bicycles,
and is a friend of at least 2 BikeHop bosses - Mr. Lawrence Lim and Mr. Willie Ong, BEFORE the short quotation notice was put up at Gebiz on the 25th January 2012
(which concluded with NParks buying 26 Brompton bicycles from BikeHop.)
Take note, these were BEFORE the procurement, not after.

End of update 3.

Now do you smell a rat? Or do you smell a fish?

Bernard Lim, Brompton fan & good friend of BikeHop even before January 2012.





[The internet is serious business.]






[PREVIOUS UPDATES] 14th Junly 2012

This is the EXTRA CSI attempt in continuation of SIM37's work at:
http://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/e...ss-ended-up-dodgy-winning-bidder-3814897.html

This EXTRA CSI will be breakdown into 3 parts.

Part 1) BikeHop's owner details uncovered.

This particular Mr. LAWRENCE LIM CHUN HOW. He is the 'Managing Director' of bikehop.
Google + Profile: https://plus.google.com/102167453582487789002/posts
BikeHop youtube channel: bikehopsgp's channel - YouTube
He has also been contacted by AsiaOne "When contacted, BikeHop managing director Lawrence Lim, 40, declined to comment." (source: Are NParks' $2,200 bikes too costly?)

His facebook 'about' page does not show his dealings with Bikeshop. It is the same when it comes to Bike-hop.com's website which does not show any more details about the owner, NOT even a single name of any 'partners'

However that cannot stop my CSI attempt to further uncover his identity.
it is evident that this is his facebook link: Lawrence Lim | Facebook

Lawrence Lim -> The one on right

He is linked with BikeHop's Facebook: BikeHop Singapore | Facebook
Another photo here: http://a3.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/s720x720/394058_177099715721349_1343952122_n.jpg

i don't wanna give the government more money by paying $5.50 to know more about bikehop. later they use the money to buy Maserati for traffic police from TuckedUp Performance Motors Pte Ltd.

guess our pals here can start with a lim chun how lawrence. is he the offspring of some higher mortal?

C110296983 Apply for a New Company Name

Receipt No. : ACR0001014651856
Transaction Date :15/07/2011
Lodged By : LIM CHUN HOW LAWRENCE
Folio No. : 1

C110309391 Company Incorporation

Receipt No. : ACR0001014738303
Transaction Date :22/07/2011
Lodged By : LIM CHUN HOW LAWRENCE
Folio No. : 2

C110350081 CHANGE OF PARTICULARS OF OFFICERS OF LOCAL COMPANY

Receipt No. : ACR0001014933267
Transaction Date :08/08/2011
Lodged By : LIM CHUN HOW LAWRENCE
Folio No. : 3

C110678688 Return of Allotment of Shares

Receipt No. : ACR0001016392299
Transaction Date :12/12/2011
Lodged By : LIM CHUN HOW LAWRENCE
Folio No. : 4

C120044429 Notice by Local Company of Transfer of Shares / Change in Particulars of Shareholders

Receipt No. : ACR0001017019765
Transaction Date :01/02/2012
Lodged By : LIM CHUN HOW LAWRENCE
Folio No. : 5

C120044546 CHANGE OF PARTICULARS OF OFFICERS OF LOCAL COMPANY

Receipt No. : ACR0001017020428
Transaction Date :01/02/2012
Lodged By : LIM CHUN HOW LAWRENCE
Folio No. : 6

--

Part 2) Gebiz Quotation Notice CSI Analysis

(Contact person for that quotation: Name Wesley Su Weiqiang Tel 81271682
Email WESLEY_SU@NPARKS.GOV.SG)

ITQ No.: NPB000ETQ12000033
Ref.737-01/12

Publication Date and Time 25/01/2012 4:40 PM
Closing Date and Time 30/01/2012 11:59 PM

(Source: GeBIZ Partner :: Main )
--
If you see carefully, the quotation period as set by the National Parks' quotation officer, is ONLY 5 days. So why such a rush??
Infact, 28th & 29th January is Saturday & Sunday.
Thus, it leaves very little room for potential bidders to be aware of this tender.
So, my question is, does it seem like the Nparks quotation officer is trying to rap it up AS SOON AS POSSIBLE and call it a day within 3 working days? 26th (Thur), 27th (Fri) and 30th January (Monday)?

Judging from the specs requirement (see below) drawn up by the NParks quotation officer, it seems that he knows well about foldable bikes.
Thus, how can he not know that they are many foldable bike suppliers out there in Singapore who could have also bidded? Why was the quotation period restricted to just 3 working/business days? Why didn't he lengthen the period so to allow and COMPARE more options from other would-be/possible bidders, instead of just 1 bidder which is NOT even a proper bicycles seller?

Is it possible that Nparks (Or the purchasing officer) already have a particular model or brand of foldable bike from a particular company already on his mind before they publish the quotation notice at Gebiz?


--


Part 3) QUESTIONABLE requirements in quotation notice
(Which might have escaped your suspicion at first glance.):

Basically:
1— Be foldable.
2— Can be brought onto public buses and MRT trains.
3— Have 16-inch wheels.
4— Weigh between 11 kg and 13 kg.
5— Have at least 6 speeds.
6— Be provided with one year's warranty and free basic servicing.

First lets look at requirement number 3 and 4.
Why must the person who drew that list, insist on 16-inch wheels?
Well, a simple search on the web shows that, that is NOT the only wheel size that foldable bikes can have.
Also worth noticing is that It is stated in official Brompton Bike UK website that ALL their Bompton bikes ONLY come with 16 inch wheels. Source: FAQs | Brompton Bicycle
Thus, it seems (to me) that MAYBE the Npark staff is ALREADY aiming on that particular Brompton brand?

Then the weight. Why must it be between 11-13kg? If some one really wants to look for a light weight bike , wouldn't he just list the requirement as 'be Less than 13kg'? Instead of narrowing it down to just between "11-13kg"??? Does It mean that Nparks will reject using a foldable bike that is 10kg or lighter? (Again, a little web search can leads you to Quality/Branded foldable bikes that are lighter than 11kg) Does this sound logical to you now?
Or was the officer trying to narrow it down to a PARTICULAR model?
Hmmm....

Now lets look at point 5 "Have at least 6 speeds."
This time that guy is abit more clever, atleast now he didn't require the bikes to have a range of speed from eg. 4-8 speed. (Like that illogical weight requirement).
But then again, why am i not surprised that the Brompton M6L model has EXACTLY 6 speeds?
Hmmm HMMMmmm HMMMMMMM!....

And don't get me started on point 6. We all know by now that BikeHop is NOT the official dealer in Singapore for Brompton brand bikes.

--


I'm not making any accusation. I'm only asking questions. Very very important questions as the procurement are made using PUBLIC FUNDS.

For more explosive CSI, please read SIM37's thread at: http://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/e...ss-ended-up-dodgy-winning-bidder-3814897.html


--





The following is a question submitted by Cannonmaster:
"What if the procurement person genuinely felt that the particular brand/model is ideal?"

Well, He still has to answer atleast 4 questions:

1) Why did he set only 3 working days for the quotation period. (3.5 working days If u wish include the 1/2 day which is the posting date 25th January 2012 at 4.40PM onwards).
3 working days for 26 high end bicycles costing $2,200 each.
$57,200 is higher than alot of Singaporeans' 2 years income.
And you just open and shut the whole thing in 3 working days?
Are you kidding me? We are not dealing with 26 ping-pong balls here!

2) Why was the bid accepted when there is only 1 bidding company which their main core-business is not even selling bicycles and also NOT the official dealer of Brompton brand bikes?

3) Why accept the bid when NParks know that for just $50 more per bicycle, they would have gotten 5 years servicing/warranty from Authorized Brompton bike dealers?
You never know if authorized dealers knew about the tender back then, they might have bided with cheaper price + 5 years servicing/warranty.
Now please ask yourself, what does the phrase 'value for money' really mean?

4) Since the procurement person/department knows so well about foldable bikes, as evident from their spec requirements, why didn't they extent the quotation period so as to allow more possible bidders?
I checked MFA's latest 'Marked Policed bicycle' quotation notice. Even they allowed 1 month quotation period. So back to the 1st question for the procurement officer: Why and where were you rushing to?

Reminder: We are not talking about NParks' money, we are not even talking about the Ministry's money here. We are talking about public funds. Singapore tax payers' money.

 

[Alpha_Hippo]

go ECP see see you'll be surprised.
EDMW got bike thread also. Ask a Bicycle Question

thanks for visiting unker thread. All in all I have spent 30k on bicycles.

 

[tarui04]

wah wah wah

more juicy news

 

[blitzz]

Bumpz for CSI work

 

[metaknecht]

teh internetz ish zerious biznuss...

 

[Chop+Bend]

open more can of worms!!! let nParks rot!!

 

[mirukuboi]

Seems like the person calling for the bid already knows what he wants in mind. Loophole in procurement.

 

[foreseer]

corruption at work likely

 

[euko82]

Can summarize????

 

[rowrife]

 

[twinkle07]

isn't this same as the other thread

 

[xaiver0510]

bookmark for saga