Lift maintenance Contract - Is graft at work?

Like many others, I discovered an anonymous pink note in my letterbox asking me to vote for the Schindler contract. It stated that Schindler had never lost "a unit of the same model as CC" I don't know what they mean by "lost" and assume this is sanitised language for a fatal incident. It continues to say the alternative supplier has no experience with this particular model which given their license and ISO accreditation I find difficult to believe.

I also received a Schindler headed letter extolling the benefits of the Schindler tender and damning suppositions as to the alternate tenderer's capability. I noted the legal disclaimer at the bottom to protect from any libel recriminations.

I don't know the author of this notice or why the MO allowed what are blatantly biased documents to be circulated in this fashion. It certainly breaches all ICAC directives as to fair and proper practice and gives the alternate tender no chance of reply.

By use of it's carefully crafted language, the author clearly wishes to avoid certain significant issues:

1. Schindler manufactured and maintained lifts have been the cause of several deaths worldwide and in particular a nine year old child here in HK. Schindler finally settled out of court before the negligence trial started. They do NOT have a perfect safety record in fact far from it.

2. The huge cost premium for Schindler on a like for like service schedule.

3. Both tenders are licensed, hold ISO accreditation & have to operate to EMSD guidelines and safety procedures.

This is a matter for individual interpretation and democratic vote and I am not trying to influence anybody. However the MO and DOC should ensure all facts are equitably represented for both parties.

This biased reporting and lack of transparency leads the more cynical (including me) to ask if graft is involved? Why is someone is going to such lengths to promote the Schindler version? Why are we only receiving one side of the story?

Don't forget the MO gets 10% overide on this tender which means a significant revenue increase if the Schindler quote is chosen.

The DOC should investigate the circumstances behind this document, why it was circulated and by whom if nothing else but to protect their integrity. That way we can be satisfied nothing underhanded is going on.