The bid to select a builder for the Seongsu strategic maintenance zone District 4 dwellings redevelopment maintenance project was declared void just one day after the deadline. Daewoo Engineering & Construction has raised issues with the association's decision-making process and procedural matters. Industry officials say it is hard to find a case where a bid was closed immediately after competitive bidding was established, without any separate supplementation or evaluation procedures. Generally, when competitive bidding is formed, a final evaluation is conducted after proposal comparisons and supplementation procedures.
According to the maintenance industry on the 10th, the Seongsu District 4 association closed the bid to select the builder on the 9th. Daewoo Engineering & Construction and Lotte Engineering & Construction participated in this bid.
The day after the bid closed, the association notified that it had declared the bid void on the grounds that a particular bidder failed to submit drawings in some areas, and then issued a second bid notice. The association's position is that Daewoo Engineering & Construction failed to submit detailed drawings in the areas of "retaining structures, electrical, communications, structural, landscaping, firefighting, mechanical, and ancillary civil engineering," which posed a problem.
After the second bid notice was issued, Daewoo Engineering & Construction said, "The association's declaration of a void bid ignores legal procedures, relevant regulations, and precedents," adding, "We express serious concern that the current situation could allow the bid to proceed in a way favorable only to a particular construction company, and we are carefully reviewing the procedural validity in accordance with relevant laws and precedents." Lotte Engineering & Construction did not issue a separate statement.
In the maintenance industry, the failed attempt to select a builder for Seongsu District 4 is being called unusual. It is rare to see a case where a bid is terminated on the grounds of documents that were not requested, when the relevant materials are not clearly defined as mandatory items that must be submitted at the bidding stage.
An official in the maintenance business said, "According to Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT) guidelines, the bid stage for selecting a builder is not for detailed design, but a stage to compare conceptual design, construction costs, and project execution capability," adding, "There is almost no precedent for invalidating the bid itself solely because detailed design documents for specific areas were not submitted."
This failed bid in Seongsu District 4 appears likely to raise legal issues. In the past, courts have ruled that stripping bid eligibility solely because some design documents were not submitted during the builder selection bidding process for a maintenance project is not appropriate. There has also been a ruling that applying standards retroactively after the bid to nullify the competition itself should be approached with caution.
In addition, whether the association went through internal approval procedures, such as a board of directors or delegates' meeting, in the process of deciding to void the bid is expected to be an important issue. Selecting a builder is a core matter that directly affects project profitability and members' burdens, and major decisions are typically made through internal decision-making bodies.
A maintenance project expert noted, "Judging a bid's validity falls within the association's discretion, but that discretion must also be exercised within the scope of the articles of association and procedures," adding, "If the bid was declared void without a board or delegates' resolution, controversy over procedural violations may arise later."
Industry officials say this matter should be seen not as an issue at a particular site, but as one concerning procedural transparency and fairness across maintenance projects. A legal expert said, "The association is the entity responsible for managing competition fairly," adding, "Ensuring procedural transparency and predictability is ultimately the way to protect the association and its members."