How to bypass the bidding procedure at a state-owned enterprise. Fraud at land auctions, what to do? Who knows how to manage

You've probably been surprised at how often someone wins a bid for an item you're interested in a split second before it ends. Of course, because every experienced buyer eBay auction has its own trading strategy. And this is a whole art! Beat your competitors, buy a valuable product, and without raising the price, leaving it as reasonable as possible. And all this among many competitors. Everyone knows that entire wars are fought at auctions for good lots. Competitors, if they don’t buy the product, will at least ruin your joy of buying it at a high price. Sometimes gambling Buyers in the heat of the moment pay much more for a product than it actually costs.

This problem is partly helped by the "Proxy Bidding" function available on eBay, when you define in your eBay account the maximum bid that you are willing to make (this bid will not be visible to other bidders). The system begins to bargain for you, raising the price each time as soon as someone outbids you. But it will not work for the “maximum” amount you have determined. The main disadvantage of this function is that bidding is still conducted openly and in most cases you win the lot, if not for the maximum price you set, then for something very similar to it. Another drawback is that ProxyBidder checks the status of the bidding only once every five minutes, which is often when the decisive bid takes place. Also, do not forget that by indicating the maximum price and “launching” the system for bidding, you cannot “replay” and cancel everything, and if the bid you make wins, according to eBay rules you are required to buy the product, this is a fact.

“Sniper” programs can completely help solve these problems. These are online services opened by companies who decided to earn extra money and satisfy the huge market demand. The scheme is simple. Experienced buyers usually do not accept active participation in bidding without spurring other participants. They place a winning bid some seconds before the end of bidding on the item. And this rate exceeds the previous maximum, not by much. This is the most common technology of experienced Buyers and was taken as the basis for “snipers”. You download and install a small program on your computer, install it, it automatically connects to the service and you start trading. It is enough to specify the lot number and your maximum price - the “sniper” will “shoot” and make a winning bid in last moment, some seconds before the end of the auction. But it will only fire if the maximum price you set has not been exceeded. The most important advantage is that the “sniper” makes the lowest possible winning bets. This is a super find!

Almost all such services are paid. Periodically, very cheap or free “snipers” appear and disappear, but the fact that in order to work, the “sniper” needs to provide the login and password to your eBay account stops many and they prefer respectable companies. After all, if your data falls into the hands of scammers, there will be very little funny. You really shouldn’t give your account passwords to just anyone. You need to know proven services, which we will discuss below.

In the meantime, here are the main advantages of using Snipers:

1) Firstly, it's convenient. You no longer have to sit at the computer on weekends and evenings, nervously waiting for the end of the auction. You also don't have to keep track of the end times of 10 different lots in your head... Using the "sniper" you can place your bid in advance and instruct the program to bid in the last 2-3 seconds of the auction!

2) Secondly, the “sniper” saves you money! If you start placing bids a few days before the auction ends, trying to outbid any new bids in order to remain the leader, stop. This strategy only benefits the seller, since by doing this you increase the last price of the product. It is you who will subsequently have to overpay for it. Therefore, experienced users have long been using “sniper programs” on on an ongoing basis, programming the placement of bets in the last seconds.

3) You can always change your mind and cancel your bid if you find a better deal. All you need to do is delete the lot in the interface of your “sniper” service.

4) If you bid manually, ebay sends notifications to other bidders that the price has changed to get their attention. This does not happen in the case of “snipers”!

There are two types of "auction snipers":

First: Services (Server hosted sniping), located on a separate server (site).

Second: Programs (Downloadable sniper software), which you can download and install on your computer.

Now about the advantages and disadvantages of both:

Server hosted sniping is of the “set it and forget it” type. By entering the interface of such an Internet service, you set up betting and forget about everything for a while. Now you don’t need to “watch” the monitor at 3 am, or miss a football match - all the “dirty” work will be done for you! Moreover, this option is suitable for users with a slow dial-up or wap connection.

Downloadable sniper software requires that your computer is turned on and the Internet connection is established at the time the listing ends. Also, quite often, sniper programs are demanding on connection speed - a leased line or ADSL is preferable for timely placement of bets.
Summary: - programs require your presence, limiting your freedom; - are not always acceptable for our conditions, since most people use a modem connection.

There are quite a lot of snipers, which one you decide to use is your choice. Here is the list:

Auction Sentry
http://www.auction-sentry.com/
Downloadable software
The first 10 days are free.

Auction Sniper
http://www.auctionsniper.com/
Server hosted auction sniper
1% of the price of the won lot
Minimum - $0.25 / Maximum - $5

Auction Stealer
http://www.auctionstealer.com/
Server hosted auction sniper
Free account (5 bets per week, the rest are paid)

AuctionTamer Auto Bid
http://www.auctiontamer.com/
Downloadable software
For free

BidNapper
http://www.bidnapper.com/
Server hosted auction sniper
Paid

BidSpyder
http://www.bidspyder.com/
Downloadable software
For free

BidSlammer
http://www.bidslammer.com/
Server hosted auction sniper
Paid, 10¢ per bid, and 25¢ per lot won. For purchases over $10, you pay 1% of the purchase amount, with a maximum deduction of $10.

ISnipeIt
http://www.isnipeit.com/
Downloadable software
The first 20 days are free.

Esteal
http://www.esteal.net/
Server hosted auction sniper
For free

http://www.ezsniper.com/

http://www.powersnipe.com/

http://www.bidburglar.com/

http://www.gixen.com/ Free

The fact of “sniping” is well known to the technical administration of the eBay auction. It is known that many sellers and buyers are opposed to this method of bidding, as evidenced by numerous statements on the eBay forums. However, the administration took a neutral position and avoided resolving the conflict.

According to eSnipe, trading bots are used by 2% to 5% of all auction participants. The Auction Sniper company believes that there are about 5%. Recently, more advanced software with additional intelligent functions has appeared. For example, a program can participate in several trades for the same product at once. If one of the lots is won, the rest are automatically cancelled.

It seems that we are witnessing a real evolution of personal agents. The most interesting thing is that this process can no longer be stopped, because it will be simply impossible to win at an online auction without the help of a personal trading “sniper” in the very near future.

By the way, some sniper programs can work not only with eBay, but also with other online auctions.

A year has passed since it came into force Federal law No. 223-FZ “On procurement of goods, works, services certain types legal entities" The results of his actions through the prism of judicial practice are summed up general manager Accommodation Center government order Alexander Stroganov.

WHERE DOES DEJA VU COME FROM?

Observing the process of reforming procurement systems in organizations covered by Federal Law 223, it is impossible to get rid of the feeling of déjà vu. Something similar was observed at the beginning of the Federal Law FZ-94: the same mistakes, the same illiteracy and, what is especially sad, the same legal nihilism. “Why is this law there, it’s inconvenient for us!” (quote from one of the managers). The ersatzurists chose a different form: “Well, we violate, so what? Not yet judicial practice it will work out...” Unfortunately, this approach is a very common occurrence.

First of all, I would like to draw attention to the procurement methods used by customers. Of course, all customers have competitions and auctions. However, like almost everyone, there is a request for proposals. There are also methods that are more exotic for our country: proposals to make offers, tenders, open request for proposals for the right to conclude a contract (tender), competition for contract bidding, simple procurement, etc.

Let's pay attention to the most common method - request for proposals. How does he attract attention? Upon closer examination, it turns out that for 99% of customers this very request for proposals is practically no different from the competition, and in some cases even repeats it verbatim (from the position) right down to syntax errors. How so?

Yes, very simple. Such “smart” customers decided that if they called the competition a request for proposals and added the phrase that concluding a contract is not obligatory for them, they would thus avoid liability under the articles Civil Code. And if some customers do this out of ignorance, then another, no less significant, does it absolutely deliberately. Moreover, the latter, again, are inspired by various motives: some - to protect themselves from unscrupulous suppliers, and others - guided solely by corrupt motives. An “unwanted” supplier, no matter how conscientious he may be, must know that he will not receive the contract under any circumstances. The FAS did not ignore such cunning people.

Example. OJSC IDGC of Siberia announced an “open request for proposals”. According to the customer, the notice of an open request for proposals is not an announcement of either a tender or an auction, and therefore the rules governing the procedure for conducting tenders are not subject to application. The OFAS for the Republic of Khakassia recognized the open request for proposals as corresponding in form to an open competition and appealed to the court to declare it invalid.

It should be especially noted that in this case the position of the courts completely coincided with the position of the FAS.

By the decision of the Arbitration Court of the Republic of Khakassia dated July 13, 2009 in case No. A74-1875/2009, an open request for proposals meeting the criteria open competition, was declared invalid due to the company’s violation of the procedure for determining the winner of the auction.

By the decision of the Third Arbitration Court of Appeal, the decision of the arbitration court of first instance was left unchanged, the appeal was not satisfied.

THEY WILL TELL THEN

The practice of creating preferential conditions for companies that have a past (or present) contractual relationship with the customer has taken root. A typical example. The customer establishes in the documentation a requirement to submit letters of authorization as part of the application. Let's not go into now legal subtleties the very status of such documents, but when considering applications the following things often happen: one participant submits such letters, the other does not, but both are allowed. To perplexed questions, the customer, not at all embarrassed, answers: “Well, this is an insignificant violation.” Or failure to provide a current extract from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities as part of the application. “But we know them, we trust them, they just didn’t have time to get it. They will report later,” the customer gives the argument.

Of course, such cases cannot be called anything other than gross violations not only the norms of legislation, but also the principles of bidding themselves - equality, fairness, competition. Based on general principles rights, any deviations that go beyond the limits established by the customer should be considered “significant”. By establishing a requirement (and not a wish) for the participant to submit authorization letters or a current (for the customer) extract from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities, the customer thereby makes it clear that this document is important for the subsequent conclusion of the contract, that is, it has legal significance and directly affects the formation of legal relations.

In 99% of the documentation you can also find the following phrase: “By decision of the commission, the applicant may be allowed to participate in the competition if there are insignificant deviations in the application from the requirements established by this documentation (the creation of preferential conditions for one or more applicants is not allowed). Deviations are considered insignificant if they:

Do not affect the composition, volume, timing, quality and other characteristics of the goods (work, services) to be supplied (performed, rendered);

They do not limit the rights of the customer or the obligations of the supplier/contractor/performer under the contract in comparison with what they are provided for in the documentation.”

As a justification, customers give the following argument: “And if, for example, a participant submits an application with deviations from the requirements, should he be rejected for a comma?” This “justification” does not stand up to any criticism, since the correctness of the proposal is also one of the requirements (and not a wish) of the documentation; in addition, the clauses about the “insignificance” of deviations do not contain a clear answer to what is meant by them and how “significant” they should be be so as to lead to the rejection of a particular application.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN VOID AND VOID

It is worth recalling that auctions conducted in violation of the rules established by law may be declared invalid by the court at the request of an interested party (Part 1 of Article 449 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). And illegal admission to participation in the competition may serve as grounds for the court to invalidate it.

Thus, the Department of Health of the Perm Region held an open competition, in which two companies took part and, accordingly, one of them was recognized as the winner. However, the losing participant filed a claim with the arbitration court to declare the competition invalid. The plaintiff justified his claims by the fact that the winner did not provide a license to carry out the activities that were the subject of the competition (did not have one), and also did not have the necessary experience in the subject area.

The court agreed with the plaintiff’s arguments and declared the competition invalid, indicating that the competition commission should have decided to refuse admission to the future winner to participate in the competition. As a result of such a decision, only one participant would remain, which, accordingly, would make the competition invalid.

However, the appellate court overturned the decision of the first instance court, indicating that illegal admission to participation in the competition is not a basis for declaring the latter invalid, but invalid. This conclusion of the appeal court was subsequently supported by the cassation instance (resolution of the Seventeenth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated September 7, 2006, Case No. 17AP-337/2006-GK).

LEAVE THE COMPLAINT WITHOUT SATISFACTION

Another similar case regarding illegal admission relatively recently reached all the way to Supreme Court. And although in this case the punishment was already appealed - the decision to impose an administrative penalty, the courts of all instances concluded that the competition commission unreasonably allowed a company that did not have the required license to participate in the competition.

Thus, as a result of an inspection carried out by the FAS Office for the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug, it was established that the competition commission of the Department of Economic Policy of the Administration of the City of Surgut unreasonably allowed a municipal utility company to participate in the competition, the application of which did not meet the requirements, established by law Russian Federation to persons supplying goods, performing work, providing services that are the subject of bidding (license).

Based on the results of the consideration of the administrative violation case, a decision was made to impose an administrative penalty on the department employee who voted for the company to be allowed to participate in the competition. Where did this employee appeal against the “unfair” punishment. And finally, the Deputy Chairman of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation ruled:

“Resolution of the Head of the Office of the Federal Antimonopoly Service for the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug dated April 9, 2008, the decision of the judge of the Khanty-Mansiysk District Court of the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug dated May 16, 2008 and the decision of the judge of the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug dated August 21 2008, issued against N. in the case of an administrative offense under Part 7 of Art. 7.30 of the Code of the Russian Federation on administrative offenses, leave unchanged, and N.’s complaint - without satisfaction” (resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated July 29, 2009 No. 69-AD09-1).

THE CHOSEN AND THE DISSELECTED

But there is also a flip side to the coin. Other customers successfully replace a loyal attitude towards “selected” participants with an extremely disloyal approach towards “undesirables”. This is expressed in the establishment of requirements for the presentation of all kinds of licenses that are not related to the subject of procurement, certificates and references that do not exist in principle. For example, certificates stating that the participant is not acting as a defendant in legal proceedings. Participants find themselves, to put it mildly, in a difficult situation, since the courts simply cannot issue a certificate of participation in legal proceedings, if only because such a form of certificate does not exist at all.

The requirement to provide various licenses is generally found in every third purchase. Moreover, in half of the cases, such licenses have nothing to do with the subject of the purchase, and in the second half, although they are related to the subject matter, they are clearly unnecessary and do not have any impact on the execution of the contract.

Most clear example Such “excesses” of customers were demonstrated by the State Unitary Enterprise “Moscow Metro” during the procurement for the provision of services for the training and certification of specialists (managers) of the escalator service (decision of the Moscow OFAS in case No. 1-00-173/77-12 of 04/06/2012). The documentation established a requirement to provide a license for the right to carry out educational activities. The participant was unable to fulfill this requirement, was removed from participation in the procurement and appealed to the antimonopoly authority.

During the consideration of this complaint, it turned out that educational activities carried out through one-time classes various types(including lectures, internships, seminars) and not accompanied by final certification and issuance of educational documents are not subject to licensing. But in the same documentation it was stipulated that upon completion of training a document should be issued confirming only the completion of the training course. Consequently, in this case, the requirement for the mandatory presentation of a license for the right to carry out educational activities was unnecessary.

As a result, the antimonopoly authority absolutely rightly saw this as a completely unfounded restriction.

Another example. During the open auction for the provision of vehicle maintenance and repair services for state corporation"Deposit Insurance Agency" applications LLC " Construction Department No. 35" and MajorService LLC were found not to meet the documentation requirements, namely: there were no copies of documents confirming the contractual relationship with Ingosstrakh Insurance Company for car repairs; copies of documents confirming the existence of repair posts. At a meeting of the OFAS commission, it was established that the activity that is the subject of the contract has no connection with the provision of insurance services, and the subject of the contract is technologically and functionally not related to insurance activities.

All of the above examples clearly show not only a low level of legal literacy, but also sometimes a deliberate denial of the law, often associated with corrupt interests.

WHAT TO TAKE AS A CRITERIA

The procurement mechanisms themselves in Russia are still far from perfect. An example from life. Since Federal Law-223 allows for the establishment of additional requirements for bidders, customers, taking advantage of this right, without further ado, began to use such requirements as... evaluation criteria (availability of licenses for maintenance, copies of a power of attorney from the manufacturer, letters of authorization, the presence of qualified specialists certified by the manufacturer on the supplier’s staff). Needless to say, such licenses, certificates, etc. Not everyone will get it. In fact, the organizer does not reject the application due to inconsistency, but declares such a participant a loser, which is very convenient if, for example, 2-3 applications are submitted to the competition.

However, such requirements may be a condition for participation in the auction, therefore, the presence or absence of documents in the bids determined by the auction organizer as mandatory for submission, as well as the participant’s compliance or non-compliance with the established requirements cannot in any way be criteria for evaluating proposals.

There are often cases when customers apply criteria not provided for by the regulations, and sometimes even ignore them altogether. Let's give an example. The participant complained about OJSC Russian railways"represented by the October Traffic Control Directorate - structural unit Central Directorate of Traffic Control - branch of JSC Russian Railways and organizer of the open competition - St. Petersburg regional office The Center for Organizing Competitive Procurement is a structural subdivision of JSC Russian Railways. The subject of the complaint was the absence in the tender documentation of the significance of the evaluation criteria, an indication of the evaluation ratings in points obtained as a result of the evaluation according to the criteria, and the calculation methodology by which the customer will evaluate received applications in order to identify better conditions execution of the contract. In addition, in the tender documentation, the criteria by which applications are assessed and compared are not defined in accordance with the criteria, the list of which is defined in the procurement regulations.

Indeed, why? It was prescribed in the regulations - and that’s enough! And from the customer’s point of view, the fact that the criteria listed in the documentation were not entirely related to the criteria defined by the procurement regulations is not worth paying attention to.

WHAT IS EPISTEMOLOGICAL ANARCHISM

Some “systems” repeat exactly the tricks that government customers went to at the dawn of Federal Law-94. I will mention one of them, used when purchasing equipment.

The fact is that, according to this “system”, the weighting coefficients of the evaluation criteria are multiplied by... the place that a particular participant took, depending on the attractiveness of the proposal. Simply put, the customer set the maximum acceptable delivery date - October 31st. And one application provides for exactly this deadline, while a participant who offered to deliver products by October 30 will receive exactly the same number of times more points than if he were ready to fulfill his obligations by July 1. The same applies to price, warranty period, and other criteria.

And if the customer wanted to develop services for interaction between citizens and government authorities, or, more simply put, to add to the list of government and municipal services on the appropriate portal? Please note - on a single portal, this is important!

It includes such a criterion as experience in performing similar work in the subject area. It seems like nothing special, a completely common approach used by the vast majority of customers. Our customer even tried to reveal what he meant by “similar”, however, this resulted in a banal retelling terms of reference, but the impulse itself is appreciated.

But here’s what turns out: the customer is interested not just in experience, but in its implementation in the maximum number of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, that is, 1000 successful implementations in Moscow cannot be compared with 15 implementations in small municipalities, but... in different subjects. Moreover, apparently, according to the “brilliant” idea of ​​the customer, the system of assigning points for the number of these subjects miraculously was able to cast doubt on all the teachings of the ancient mathematicians of Egypt, Babylon and Greece taken together, and neglect the principles of proportion.

It looked like this. The experience of performing work in the number of subjects was measured in the number of points: 1 subject - 2 points, 2 subjects - 5 points, 3 subjects - 10 points... 9 subjects - 45 points, 10 subjects - 50 points, 11 subjects - 60 points... The criterion is assessed based on from the number of subjects of the Russian Federation where work similar to the item in the lot was carried out.

The explanations that direct proportionality implies that the variables change in equal shares, that is, if the argument changes twice in any direction, then the function also changes twice in the same direction, were listened to with extreme surprise. Then came the question: “Okay... but show me where it says that this is not allowed?” “In mathematical science,” was the answer. “Proportion is from the Latin proportio - proportionality, evenness of parts.” “No, show me where the law says that this is prohibited,” the authors of the new theory insisted. This is a worthy example of epistemological anarchism, although it is a consequence of elementary ignorance.

WHO CAN MANAGE

To summarize, I would like to remind you that the number of organizations in the country is constantly increasing and, accordingly, the volume of purchases will be greater and greater. For example, on at the moment We are talking about spending a colossal amount - about 13 trillion rubles. (meaning together with government orders). And who is entrusted with managing the expenditure of these funds? “Specialists” who, at best, have completed a two-week advanced training course. None of us goes to a person who has attended a month-long course in providing first aid medical care, for his heart surgery. Why do we think things are too easy in procurement? Or are we guided by the textbook “any cook can rule the state”?

Meanwhile, there are highly qualified specialists in Russia, some of whom were at the very origins of modern procurement in Russia. And now you can take advantage of their invaluable experience and knowledge by engaging them to create curricula, methodological recommendations, conducting research and of course new laws.

Advice from an Expert - Legal Adviser

Photos on the topic

Government orders and federal contracts are a tasty morsel for any performing organization, if only because the volume of work and payments for it are guaranteed and do not depend on any third-party factors. However, the contractor can receive such an order only during electronic trading, according to the current Federal Law No. 94. Many performers are looking for ways to circumvent bidding, but how realistic is it to do this legally? Just follow these simple ones step by step tips, and you will be on the right track in resolving your legal issues.

A quick step-by-step legal guide

So, let's look at the actions that need to be taken.

Step - 1
It should be immediately noted that in order to receive a priority government order bypassing bidding, not only the contractor, but also the customer must be interested in this. Provided that the customer wants to transfer the order to a specific contractor, he can resort to a number of solutions. Next, move on to the next step of the recommendation.

Step - 2
One of the key legitimate ways to avoid bidding on a federal contract is to justify the strategic importance of the site where work will be performed under this contract, or its special danger. If the work under the contract is in one way or another connected with objects of strategic importance (overpasses, bridges, gas pipelines, etc.) or increased danger, the customer has the right to replace the tender with a competition. The main difference within the competition is that not only the provided estimates and work plans are taken into account, but also the opinion of a commission specially appointed by the customer about each contractor. In other words, the customer selects a performer, as they say, to his liking from the proposed list of relevant candidates. Next, move on to the next step of the recommendation.

Step - 3
The second option is the implementation of contracts through state corporations. This category of organizations does not fall under the law on public procurement Therefore, the choice of executors of the state corporation is carried out according to their own established internal requirements to the candidates. Next, move on to the next step of the recommendation.

Step - 4
If the choice of contractor is carried out precisely during the bidding, then the customer also has the opportunity to choose exactly the one he is interested in, without violating legal norms. In this case, the customer initially creates a list of requirements for candidates in such a way that only the contractor needed by the customer can satisfy it 100%. Next, move on to the next step of the recommendation.

Step - 5
Often, when placing a contract for tender, customers indicate incorrectly or incompletely technical requirements to the project, informing only a pre-selected performer about them. However, this method is a direct violation of the law and may entail penalties from the FAS.
We hope the answer to the question - How to bypass auctions - contains legal information useful to you. Good luck to you! To find the answer to your question, use the form -

Law No. 44-FZ “On contract system» provides a whole list of competitive procurement methods for public funds, the application of which depends on the specific conditions and subject of procurement. An excellent, “non-competitive” way to determine the counterparty to a contract is to purchase from sole supplier, which has become a very profitable tool for companies with a reputation as a reliable partner. What does the law allow and is it possible to bypass it in order to become “your” supplier, regardless of competition? How does a small business lose by falling out of the process?

Thirty-four cases

Despite the fact that the main principle of public procurement, according to the legislation of the Russian Federation, is competition, there are cases when a customer, when purchasing goods or works (services), can choose one specific supplier. But you should not abuse the procurement procedure with one participant, because abandoning the principle of competition can arouse great interest among regulatory authorities, who will never miss the opportunity to conduct an inspection.

Law No. 44-FZ “On the contract system” (Part 1, Article 93) establishes 34 cases when it is possible to purchase goods, works and services from a single supplier, contractor, or performer. The most relevant and widely applicable cases are situations where the expected contract price is small. Thus, current legislation sets the maximum allowable price for such a contract at 100 thousand rubles. And this cunning move, according to Oleg Parshin, head of SO Rustender LLC, can be used by customers.

However, the entrepreneur notes, to the credit of customers, no such violations have been identified recently and the procurement process is proceeding without violating the rules.

Representatives of the All-Russian Popular Front (ONF) hold a different opinion. Despite the fact that Russian authorities serious measures are being taken to eliminate the corruption component in public procurement; many participants in this process do not believe in fair procurement, and, in their opinion, every contract should be monitored. This was precisely what became the key topic for discussion at the forum “For Fair Procurement” in the Volga Federal District, which the ONF held in Samara in the spring.

And the doubts of the forum participants are completely justified. According to Alexander Burkov, an expert at the Institute of Purchasing and Sales Management, there are a number of violations that, at first glance, may go unnoticed. However, they are a direct violation of the law. For example, a hidden description of a certain trademark. Violations of this kind arise due to the “registration” of the requirements of the technical specifications only for one specific product from one manufacturer. There is no formal indication in the text of the documentation, for example, specific product This is a valid sign, but such a description implies the possibility of offering for the supply of only one specific product, work or service. In addition, questions may be raised by excessive detail of the requirements for technical and quality characteristics. In this case, we are talking about such a description of the procurement object, which does not fit any product on the market. In other words, the description of the procurement object may contain either impossible requirements, or requirements that in themselves are not unique, but in the aggregate constitute a non-existent product, work or service.

It is important to add that these actions may be unintentional. Common types of violations include grammatical errors errors made in the description of the procurement object, as well as an unreasonable indication of the object industrial property when the customer, describing the purchase object, requests a specific product, indicating its trade name, manufacturer’s name, etc. in cases not permitted by law.

– It should be noted that this type violations include those cases when such an indication of an object of industrial property does not apply to cases of exclusion, therefore, is unfounded, adds Alexander Burkov.

Despite the loopholes that unscrupulous participants in public procurement find in Federal Law-44, the FAS quickly detects such violations and suppresses them, including through joint work with the ONF.

At the same time, there is a condition according to which the total volume of purchases from a single supplier should not be more than 5% of the total annual volume provided for by the relevant customer schedule, and also should not exceed 50 million rubles. Therefore, we can conclude that purchasing from a single participant for many customers is the most rational and convenient way to determine a counterparty if it is necessary to purchase a small volume of goods, works and services.

What about them?

How are small businesses doing in this regard? Does he lose by dropping out of the process? The entrepreneurs themselves answered this question to us.

Igor Sklyar, representative of the KMK company:

– Federal Law No. 44-FZ gives companies that have been working in their segment for a long time and have a good reputation more opportunities to receive orders. I would consider the positive features of government procurement with a single participant to be the existence of established connections and positive experience of cooperation, since the customer always chooses the participant with whom it is easier for him to work. In addition, this is a low probability of violation of the technical component of the public procurement process, a smaller amount of work for the customer, which does not require the preparation of procurement documentation and technical specifications, as well as a shortened procedure compared to open tenders, where the customer needs to review the applications of participants and make their assessment. For us, this method is very convenient and profitable.

Larisa Kosinova, representative of the Alfa Elektrotekhtorg trading house:

– This is very beneficial for both parties. The risk of running into a fly-by-night company or an unscrupulous supplier is eliminated for the customer. There is no possibility for tender participants to encounter dumping of the services or goods offered. But purchasing from a single supplier can only be used for small contract amounts, and we, as a company that enters into million-dollar contracts, cannot count on such a procurement system. Therefore, unfortunately, we drop out of this process and take part in the auction for general conditions. However, an organization that is well known from previous projects also has a good chance of winning the tender for the provision of services. Therefore, in any case, Federal Law-44 provides an opportunity for small businesses to declare themselves as a quality contractor and supplier.

Oleg Parshin, head of SO Rustender LLC:

– When purchasing from a single supplier, the customer benefits more.

By the way, if an agreement was concluded for the supply of a certain volume of reagents, and the customer used them less than the planned volume, taking into account the winter with little snow, then the supplier will lose in the amount of the order. But if we compare Federal Law-94 and Federal Law-44, then in the first there were more loopholes for the corruption component, but Federal Law-44 significantly limits these possibilities. There is some transparency in procurement. Of course, when purchasing from a single supplier, small businesses fall somewhat out of the process, but since 2013 there has been a special Small Business Supplier Portal for them.

As already noted, procurement from a single participant is the most convenient way of purchasing goods, works and services, both in terms of registration and in the temporary aspect, but its implementation is possible only in cases provided for by law. All respondents expressed confidence that there is a chance to become “an insider” in procurement with a single participant only if the company has a positive reputation.

Nevertheless, on Internet forums, representatives of some companies discuss various ways to use this type of procurement, when it is not profitable for an organization to hold an auction among several participants, and it makes no sense to split the order and distribute it in parts. In this case, experts believe, it is necessary to justify the choice of purchasing from a single supplier.

Irina Surgutskova, senior lawyer of the Expert Consulting Center of the Institute of Public Procurement, writes that, based on the unofficial draft procedure for justifying the procurement method (Part 7, Article 18 of Law No. 44-FZ), the justification for a “small” purchase will be a reference to the law itself or the following explanation: “Carrying out competitive procedures is inappropriate, including the following reasons: the lack of opportunity to achieve cost savings by increasing competition through competitive procurement, due to time consumption, lack of interest in receiving an order on the part of potential suppliers (performers, contractors).”

It may take some time for the system to justify itself, but FZ-44 has already gained the trust of market participants. Nevertheless successful result The activity of any company can only be achieved by quality work and honest attitude to the public procurement process.

Text: Marina Yudina