Roundup: Mears sues Leeds Council over PQQ omissions

Mears claims that, had it known this information, it would have changed the way its tender was prepared and as such the council failed in its obligation to run a transparent selection process.

A further document obtained by Mears after it had lost out on the work contains model answers, which it claims required content that was not clear from the questions and supporting documents.

Central to Mears’ case is an alleged omission by Leeds council to set out the criteria for achieving a score of seven to 10 out of 10.

The marking guidance states firms must demonstrate innovation and value adding to gain a score over seven for an answer.

Meanwhile, Construction Enquirer reported that Mears’ core complaint was that not enough weighting was given to quality compared to price during the tender process.

It quoted an “industry expert” who said: “Mears are unhappy about the whole process and have decided to take legal action. [Bidding too low for work] is a massive issue in the social housing repair sector following the collapse of Connaught and Rok. Clients must know that accepting the cheapest bid is often not the best option in the long run.”

Solicitor Trowers & Hamlins, acting on behalf of Mears, told Building that Leeds council had failed to meet an obligation to behave transparently, as established under case law.

The case began in the High Court in London this week. Mears declined to comment.