URA will issue more summon to make up the losses?
HDB using this as an excuse to introduce the Electronic Parking System at more car parks?
This incident show that HDB do have quota for summon?
HDB, URA ‘lax’ in monitoring car park checks
By
NG JING YNG
- .
18 July
SINGAPORE — The Housing and Development Board (HDB) and the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) fared poorly when it came to managing car park enforcement contracts, the Auditor-General’s Office (AGO) said in its report released yesterday.
Its checks on HDB’s management of six car park enforcement contracts, which amounted to S$37.24 million, found that the agency “was lax” in monitoring the service providers’ performance, with “many instances of non-compliance”.
For example, surprise checks by officers from the AGO at 88 car parks found five instances where the patrolling officers were not present, even though they had indicated they were.
There were also 54 instances where the patrolling officers did not turn up for duty during the time specified, while officers failed to check on all vehicles parked in 26 instances.
“It is important for HDB to hold the service providers accountable for compliance with contract requirements. Otherwise, HDB would not be getting the full value for the public funds spent,” the AGO said.
Responding to the report, an HDB spokesperson yesterday said it will improve its monitoring of service providers’ performance.
“In addition, we will take action to impose liquidated damages on the (service providers) for their lack of compliance with the contract specifications,” she said.
The HDB will also be introducing the Electronic Parking System at more car parks, where it is technically feasible to do so, minimising the need for manual checks on the proper display of the parking coupons.
Meanwhile, the URA was also cited for its poor management of car park enforcement contracts. Through surprise checks, the Government’s auditors found patrolling officers had high absenteeism rates of between 70 and 80 per cent since 2010.
The authority had extended its three-year car park enforcement contract — amounting to about S$10 million — twice from August 2011 to Jan 31 this year at a further cost of almost S$5 million.
In response to TODAY’s queries, a URA spokesperson said the patrolling officers were “usually not ‘absent’ from the job per se, but rather did not turn up punctually” at their assigned car parks based on a specific time schedule.
“For example, the patrolling officers were engaged with a motorist and hence, delayed at other car parks or had strayed to other car parks that are not under their jurisdiction,” said the spokesperson. The hand-held terminal used by these officers will also be programmed to prevent them from “accidentally straying to other car parks”.
While the URA had imposed liquidated damages on the contractor, amounting to less than 4 per cent of monthly payments, this failed to get the contractors to perform better, the AGO noted.
“URA’s ineffective use of liquidated damages and extension of contract in spite of the contractor’s repeated failure to meet certain performance standards meant that there was no assurance that the URA had obtained the full value for the public funds spent,” the authority said.
URA, however, found the contractor’s overall performance to be satisfactory.
“Overall, it has performed well in many areas — for example, low error rates in the issuance of offence notices and responsiveness to public complaints on illegal parking,” the spokesperson said.
http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/hdb-ura-lax-monitoring-car-park-checks
HDB using this as an excuse to introduce the Electronic Parking System at more car parks?
This incident show that HDB do have quota for summon?
HDB, URA ‘lax’ in monitoring car park checks
By
NG JING YNG
- .
18 July
SINGAPORE — The Housing and Development Board (HDB) and the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) fared poorly when it came to managing car park enforcement contracts, the Auditor-General’s Office (AGO) said in its report released yesterday.
Its checks on HDB’s management of six car park enforcement contracts, which amounted to S$37.24 million, found that the agency “was lax” in monitoring the service providers’ performance, with “many instances of non-compliance”.
For example, surprise checks by officers from the AGO at 88 car parks found five instances where the patrolling officers were not present, even though they had indicated they were.
There were also 54 instances where the patrolling officers did not turn up for duty during the time specified, while officers failed to check on all vehicles parked in 26 instances.
“It is important for HDB to hold the service providers accountable for compliance with contract requirements. Otherwise, HDB would not be getting the full value for the public funds spent,” the AGO said.
Responding to the report, an HDB spokesperson yesterday said it will improve its monitoring of service providers’ performance.
“In addition, we will take action to impose liquidated damages on the (service providers) for their lack of compliance with the contract specifications,” she said.
The HDB will also be introducing the Electronic Parking System at more car parks, where it is technically feasible to do so, minimising the need for manual checks on the proper display of the parking coupons.
Meanwhile, the URA was also cited for its poor management of car park enforcement contracts. Through surprise checks, the Government’s auditors found patrolling officers had high absenteeism rates of between 70 and 80 per cent since 2010.
The authority had extended its three-year car park enforcement contract — amounting to about S$10 million — twice from August 2011 to Jan 31 this year at a further cost of almost S$5 million.
In response to TODAY’s queries, a URA spokesperson said the patrolling officers were “usually not ‘absent’ from the job per se, but rather did not turn up punctually” at their assigned car parks based on a specific time schedule.
“For example, the patrolling officers were engaged with a motorist and hence, delayed at other car parks or had strayed to other car parks that are not under their jurisdiction,” said the spokesperson. The hand-held terminal used by these officers will also be programmed to prevent them from “accidentally straying to other car parks”.
While the URA had imposed liquidated damages on the contractor, amounting to less than 4 per cent of monthly payments, this failed to get the contractors to perform better, the AGO noted.
“URA’s ineffective use of liquidated damages and extension of contract in spite of the contractor’s repeated failure to meet certain performance standards meant that there was no assurance that the URA had obtained the full value for the public funds spent,” the authority said.
URA, however, found the contractor’s overall performance to be satisfactory.
“Overall, it has performed well in many areas — for example, low error rates in the issuance of offence notices and responsiveness to public complaints on illegal parking,” the spokesperson said.
http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/hdb-ura-lax-monitoring-car-park-checks
