An official from the Urban Renewal Authority (URA) — which provided its fee-based smart tender service during Wang Fuk Court’s renovation to help building owners combat bid-rigging — admitted that they noticed unreasonable pricing by registered inspectors but did not alert the owners' corporation.
The independent inquiry into last November’s fatal No 5 alarm fire at Wang Fuk Court in Tai Po entered its 21st hearing on Thursday with three witnesses from the URA — the first time the authority has testified in the inquiry.
Testifying on Thursday morning, Matthew Chan Yat-ho, case manager of URA's Building Rehabilitation section, had been responsible for relevant works relating to the estate’s renovation work since June 2019.
Chan testified that the URA posted advertisements for the renovation work on the government-run platform Smart Tender for interested parties to submit bids, while the opening results of tenders received were handled by the owners' corporation itself. After the tender opening, the URA compiled a list of bidding prices from various companies for the corporation, and also appointed RS Surveyors Limited for an independent assessment.
ALSO READ: HKSAR govt: Wang Chi House buy-out needs 75% owners' approval
However he noted that the "Smart Tender" at the time only covered renovation contractors but not registered inspectors — a role later taken up by Will Power Architects Company in Wang Fuk Court’s case. Furthermore, RS Surveyors, hired by URA, did not assess selection of registered inspectors as well, Chan explained, because the consultant fees vary greatly between different companies. This meant that the building owners then had to hire registered inspector themselves.
Victor Dawes, lead counsel for the independent committee, noted that Will Power Architects had quoted HK$248,000 ($31,650) for building inspection services over a six month period for eight blocks, which meant a daily cost of about HK$200 per block.
Dawes asked Chan whether he found the figure unreasonably low. Chan admitted that he did, but said he didn’t dwell on whether any wrongdoing was involved, nor did he discuss it with the owners' corporation, so as "not to influence their choice”.
Chan further agreed that he didn’t consider whether a registered inspector who wins a contract at an unreasonably low price might then help a contractor reap excessive profits.
The independent committee noted that Will Power Architects wrote to the owners' corporation, attributing its low price to prior inspections and familiarity with the estate. Chan said he only learned of the letter later on. He said he did not want to comment whether the explanation was reasonable or whether the company would operate at a loss. "I just thought it really wanted to win this job," he said.
READ MORE: 1,062 Wang Fuk Court households salvaged belongings so far
Dawes noted that many residents prioritize price over potential wrongdoing, and that the URA's failure to fully analyze pricing has not resolved the bid-rigging problem. Chan said he agreed.
Two more officials from URA — Brian Yam Lap-yin, assistant manager, Building Rehabilitation and Peter Wong Se-king, director of URA’s Building Rehabilitation — are also scheduled to testify on Thursday.
The hearing continues.
