We're now part of the York & North Yorkshire Combined Authority

013/2013 – Provision of safety camera enforcement equipment  – 06 February 2013

Executive Summary and recommendation:

Following NYPA approval on 24th September 2012 for additional Safety Camera Vans and supporting resources and equipment, a procurement process was undertaken for the lease of Safety Camera Enforcement Equipment.

This Decision Making Notice seeks approval from the PCC to enter into a contract with Teletraffic for the lease of Safety Camera Enforcement Equipment.

The primary purpose of this provision is to support the reduction in the number of the people killed or injured on North Yorkshire roads through intelligence led tasking and deployment, maximising enforcement, education and community reassurance opportunities.

It is recommended that approval be granted to enter into a contract with Teletraffic for the lease of Safety Camera Enforcement Equipment.


The total (lease) cost of the Safety Camera Enforcement Equipment is included in Part 2 (Protected Commercial)

Chief Executive decision under delegated powers


06 February 2013

Part 1 – Unrestricted facts and advice to the PCC

1. Introduction and background

On 24th September 2012 and following a successful pilot scheme, NYPA approved the rollout of additional safety camera vans, the recruitment of police staff to resource the operation and the equipment necessary to facilitate the detection of traffic violations.

The primary purpose of this provision is to support the reduction in the number of people killed or injured on North Yorkshire roads through intelligence led tasking and deployment maximising enforcement, education and community reassurance opportunities

The safety cameras will have the capability to detect the speed of approaching and receding traffic from up to 1,000 metres away and capture 360 degree images of the location.

The devices will be effective at detecting motorcycles and producing high-quality images of vehicles and the riders or drivers.

The devices will use integrated camera technology which will be capable of detecting violations from approaching and receding vehicles in both daylight and low light conditions

The devices will be leased as this area of enforcement is continually being upgraded with new and more sophisticated equipment. The lease agreement will ensure that business continuity is provided as the leased equipment allows replacement equipment to be available following technological advances and Home Office approval.

1.1. Procurement Procedure

The estimated value for the 4 year term of the contract was initially calculated at above the EU tendering threshold (£173,934). The procurement was conducted using the EU ‘open’ procedure as market research had demonstrated that there was a limited number of suppliers able to provide this equipment.

The requirement was advertised in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) and on the Bluelight e-tendering system.

The Invitation to Tender (ITT) documentation was drafted by the Regional Procurement team and representatives of the Safety Camera Project team. It was also reviewed and approved by the NYP members of the Safety Camera Project Board and the evaluation team. The evaluation team comprised:

  • Andrew Tooke (NYP) – Operations Manager – NYP
  • Andrew Forth (NYP) – Enforcement Officer – NYP

The evaluation team agreed the scoring criteria prior to the ITT being issued. After consultation with Finance and Safety Camera Project Board members, the ratio of scoring was agreed as 60% quality (including 2% for completion of a Company Data Questionnaire), 40% cost.

The proposed evaluation matrices were approved by the evaluation team prior to the tender documentation being issued.

Tender clarifications were received, and responded to, through the Bluelight e-tendering system throughout the tender period.

22 Expressions of Interest (EOI’s) were registered and 2 ITT’s were submitted on Bluelight by the response deadline of 27th December 2012.

1.2. Evaluation Process

The evaluation of ITTs took place on the 28th December 2012

The following companies submitted ITT responses:

  • Truvelo
  • Teletraffic

Evaluation of the responses took place between 28th December 2012 and 14th January 2013. The following scores were allocated:

Evaluation Score Truvelo Teletraffic
60% Quality 45.76 56.65
40% Cost 24.23 18.11
Total 69.99 74.76

The tender submission from Teletraffic Ltd provided the most economically advantageous tender.

In accordance with EU procurement legislation, the successful and unsuccessful tenderers have been notified subject to the 10 day Alcatel standstill period which finishes on Thursday 24th January 2013.

The contract period is 3 years, with the option to extend for up to a further 4 years, on an annual basis.

2. Matters for consideration

It is requested that approval be granted to enter into a contract with Teletraffic for the lease of Safety Camera Enforcement Equipment.

3. Other options considered, if any


4. Contribution to Police and Crime Plan outcomes

As outlined in the initial Decision Making Notice, the leasing of this equipment will support the overarching contribution to the Police and Crime Plan outcomes:

The reduction of those killed and seriously injured on the roads of North Yorkshire is a clearly defined objective within the current policing plan. The implementation of the enhanced safety camera van operation will produce outcomes that directly contribute to the achieving of this objective.

5. Consultations carried out

Further to the consultation that was carried out for the presentation of the initial Business Case to NYPA, colleagues from Finance and Legal Services have provided advice and guidance

6. Financial Implications/Value for money

Although the equipment will be leased, technical accounting requirements mean that the cost of the equipment will be capitalised in the accounts, and an equal and opposite liability created. The capital cost is included in the current MTFP for 2012-13.

7. Legal Implications

The unsuccessful supplier has the opportunity to challenge the contract award decision during the Alcatel period. To date, no challenge has been received.

8. Equality Implications

No equality implications are perceived

Public Access to information

The Police and Crime Commissioner wishes to be as open and transparent as possible about the decisions he/she takes or are taken in his/her name. All decisions taken by the Commissioner will be subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).

As a general principle, the Commissioner expects to be able to publish all decisions taken and all matters taken into account and all advice received when reaching the decision. Part 1 of this Notice will detail all information which the Commissioner will disclose into the public domain. The decision and information in Part 1 will be made available on the NYPCC web site within 2 working days of approval.

Only where material is properly classified as restricted under the GPMS or if that material falls within the description at 2(2) of The Elected Local Policing Bodies (Specified Information) Order 2011 will the Commissioner not disclose decisions and/or information provided to enable that decision to be made. In these instances, Part 2 of the Form will be used to detail those matters considered to be restricted. Information in Part 2 will not be published.

Is there a Part 2 to this Notice – YES (please delete as appropriate)

If Yes, what is the reason for restriction – COMMERCIAL COST RESTRICTION

Tick to confirm statement (√)
Director/Chief Officer COR Carter has reviewed the request and is satisfied that it is correct and consistent with the NYPCC’s plans and priorities.
Legal AdviceLegal advice has been sought on this proposal and is considered not to expose the PCC to risk of legal challenge or such risk is outlined in Part 1 or Part 2 of this Notice.
Financial AdviceThe CC CFO has been consulted on this proposal, for which budgetary provision already exists or is to be made in accordance with Part 1 or Part 2 of this Notice.
Equalities AdviceThere are no changes to the equality impact assessment that was undertaken for the approved Business Case. Either there is considered to be minimal impact or the impact is outlined in Part1 or Part2 of this Notice.
I confirm that all the above advice has been sought and received and I am satisfied that this is an appropriate request to be submitted for a decisionSignature Date 6 February 2013
Published on