Gas Central Heating Installations

This tender is critically flawed due to a direct contradiction between its 'active' status and explicit cancellation, rendering all requirements non-applicable and making it impractical for bidding.

The tender's 'active' status directly contradicts the explicit cancellation notice, creating a significant legal ambiguity. For a tender listed as 'active', the absence of applicable requirements (exclusion, eligibility, technical, financial) is a major legal non-compliance. While the initial procedure type and CPV code were correctly defined, the overall legal framework for a live tender is absent.

While the description of the project scope is clear, the overall clarity is severely compromised by the conflicting 'active' status and the explicit cancellation. This ambiguity makes it unclear to potential bidders whether the tender is open for submissions. Furthermore, the absence of specified evaluation criteria is a direct clarity issue.

Basic metadata such as title, reference, organization, value, duration, and location are provided. However, the tender is fundamentally incomplete as a bidding opportunity because all essential requirements (eligibility, technical, financial, submission, and evaluation criteria) are explicitly stated as 'not applicable' due to the cancellation.

The absence of evaluation criteria for a tender listed as 'active' is a critical fairness issue, as bidders cannot understand the basis for assessment. The requirement to 'express interest to gain full access' to a cancelled tender also raises questions about transparency. The overall contradictory status undermines the principles of fair competition.

The tender's cancellation renders it entirely impractical for any potential bidder to respond. Additionally, there is ambiguity regarding electronic submission support and a direct document URL is not provided, which would be minor practical concerns even if the tender were live.

The most severe issue is the direct contradiction between the 'Status: active' in the basic information and the explicit statements of cancellation within the AI-extracted requirements and the official PDF document. This fundamental inconsistency is highly misleading.

The tender documentation does not include any explicit mention of green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. It is also not indicated as being EU funded, which often correlates with higher sustainability standards.