Decision

RESOLVED that the Portfolio Holder approves the award of contracts for the projects set out below:

A     FRA Works District Wide 2, covering 80–99 Wedhey, 109–124 and 1–16 Little Grove Field, and 63–106 Church End: Approve the award of the contract to Chas Berger Ltd in the sum of £4,678,799.58 excluding VAT. A 10% contingency of £467,879.96 excluding VAT has been applied, giving a total contract value of £5,146,679.54 excluding VAT (£6,176,015.45 including VAT).

B     External Construction Windows Programme 3: Approve the award of the contract to J&J Windows and Doors Limited for the total sum of £1,173,842 excluding VAT (£1,408,610.40 inclusive of VAT) for a duration of twelve months.

C     District Wide Works Programme Building Regulator Principal Designer (BRPD) (Direct Award - Frankham Consultancy Group Limited): Approve the award of the contract to Frankham Consultancy Group Limited for the total sum of £1,144,599.00 excluding VAT (£1,373,518.80 inclusive of VAT).

D     Asbestos – Services 2026/29 3 Years. Asbestos - Inspections and Air Testing Services: Approve the direct award of a 3 year call off contract under the Procurement services Asbestos Inspections and Removal Services Framework (Y23061) to O.C. Consulting (UK) Limited for the total sum of £660,000.00 Excluding VAT (£792,000.00 Inclusive of VAT).

E      Asbestos – Works 2026/29 3 Years. Asbestos – Removal – Works:  Approve the direct award of a 3 year call off contract under the Procurement services Asbestos Inspections and Removal Services Framework (Y23061) to ARG Europe Limited for the total sum of £660,000.00 Excluding VAT (£792,000.00 Inclusive of VAT).

Reasons for the decision

Support the procurement and delivery of part of the Housing Capital Programme for 2026–2028. This is the largest housing stock reinvestment programme Harlow has undertaken, totalling £162 million over two years. The programme will significantly improve residents’ homes and help keep tenants and leaseholders safe.

Alternative options considered

Do Nothing The option to make no change was considered but rejected, as it would result in inconsistent and reactive service delivery. This would limit the Council’s ability to meet demand effectively, achieve value for money and maintain assurance, coordination and alignment with statutory duties and strategic priorities.

Carry Out the Services in House The option to deliver the works fully in-house was also considered but not progressed. While some elements may be delivered internally, the scale, complexity and specialist nature of the works require access to additional skills, capacity and expertise. An external contractor therefore provides greater resilience and supports effective delivery.