Tenders Are Invited For Renovation Works In The Premises Of The Łódź Customs And Tax Office In Łódź At Ul. Fr. Brzóski 24

1. The Subject Of The Order Is The Performance Of Renovation Works In The Premises Of The Łódź Customs And Tax Office In Łódź At Ul. Fr. Brzóski 24 (Painting Of Rooms, Passageways, Toilets And Replacement Of Lighting) As Part Of The Task Entitled: Renovation And Painting Works Of Office Rooms On The Ground Floor Of The Building, Including The Replacement Of Lighting Lamps And Installation Equipment. The Building Used By The Łódź Customs And Tax Office, Łódź Ul. Ks. Brzóski 24, Occupied By Employees Of The Audit Department Of The Tax Administration Chamber In Łódź. This Subject Of The Contract Is Financed From Funds From The Eu Budget And Non-Repayable Funds From Assistance Granted By Efta Member States (Ice), To Be Financed Under Technical Assistance For European Funds (Ptfe).2.In These Proceedings, The Contract Was Not Divided Into Parts Due To The Nature And Specificity Of The Subject Of The Contract. The Subject Of The Order Is The Performance Of Functionally Related Works, Carried Out On One Building, On A Limited Area In The Building. The Floor On Which Renovation Works Will Be Carried Out Will Not Be Closed To Use, And Work May Be Carried Out In A Maximum Of 2 Rooms At The Same Time. The Subject Of This Order Is Mostly General Construction Works, Constituting A Technologically Uniform Construction Process, While The Remaining Works Are Accompanying Works That Are Technologically Interconnected And Are Necessary To Perform The Main Scope Of Construction Works. Separating The Works Would Pose A Risk Of Organizational Problems That Cannot Be Eliminated, Related To Responsibility For Individual Elements Of The Works Performed By Different Contractors And Cooperation Between Companies. It Would Also Be Problematic To Demarcate Contractors Liability For Occupational Health And Safety Conditions And Construction Site Security, As Well As To Clearly Define The Principles Of Third-Party Liability Insurance (E.G. In The Event Of Simultaneous Performance Of Works By Many Contractors, It Would Be Difficult To Determine The Entity Responsible For Damage Covered By The Third-Party Liability Insurance Policy). Moreover, The Following Circumstances Indicate That The Division Of The Contract Into Parts Is Not Justified: - A Delay By One Of The Contractors Would Have A Negative Impact On The Timely Completion Of The Entire Task; - Each Contractor Would Include Separate Costs Of The Third-Party Liability Insurance Policy In The Price, Which Would Increase The Level Of Expenses Ordering Party, - Dividing The Order Would Create A Risk In Which Invalidation Of One Of The Parts Of The Procedure Would Jeopardize The Timely Implementation Of The Task. To Sum Up, The Ordering Party Did Not Divide The Contract Into Parts Due To The Fact That Such A Division Would Pose A Risk Of Excessive Technical Difficulties And Excessive Costs Of Contract Execution. The Need To Coordinate The Activities Of Different Contractors Implementing Individual Parts Of The Contract Could S