Clarifications

78. We refer to Joint Schedule 7 (Financial Difficulties), clause 3.3 - We wouldn't be able to provide requested information externally based on unpublished results as we are part of a listed Group. We only can provide an audited and published data. Can you confirm that this would be acceptable?

77. We refer to Joint Schedule 7 (Financial Difficulties), all the notification requirements seems onerous and not always possible to comply, especially clause 4.3.1 requesting meeting within 3 Working Days. We would suggest notification requirements of 30 days.

76. We refer to Joint Schedule 7 (Financial Difficulties), Part f of the Financial Distress definition bullet iv - cancellation or suspension of indebtedness - how do things like suspension of VAT payments under COVID19 fit into this - would that be a trigger?

75. We refer to Joint Schedule 7 (Financial Difficulties), part (f) of the Financial Distress definition. The clause refers to "financial indebtedness" but does not define it, nor does it indicate any level of materiality. Would it mean that even £200 would be a trigger? Is there expectation to start discussion with CCS on any such occasion? Could we have a more pragmatic approach and apply any definition of "financial indebtedness" and a level of materiality?

74. We refer to Joint Schedule 7 (Financial Difficulties) - Annex 2 together with "Credit Rating" definition and "Financial Distress Event" definition, bullet a). As per Annex we should use the "Failure Rating" - we have assumed that to be the failure score, which is a score out of 100 to measure how likely a business is to fail in the next 12 months and gives us the "risk indicator" part of our credit rating. Our current failure score is 97. A 10% fall would take us to 87 - which would still give us a risk indicator of 1 (failure score in the range of 86-100)- the best a company can have - it certainly wouldn't indicate any type of distress, but under current definition it would be. It means that we would need to go into conversation even being in the best score possible, which isn't really pragmatic. Therefore we suggest to use less sensitive measure, like a drop of two or more levels in our credit rating, which would be a more pragmatic approach. Could you consider amending Annex 2 and use "Credit Rating" instead of "Failure Rating" and the threshold being to fall by two levels?

73. We refer to DPS Schedule 7 cl. 2.2.1 which allows to reject the bid, but on the other hand as per DPS Schedule 4 cl.3.4 - repeated failure to bid may result in suspension from DPS. Can you please confirm if Supplier can reject the Order?

72. Clauses 7.1 - Please can the Authority consider that although the Supplier is able to provide reasonable co-operation to the Authority in the event that it receives a claim under pursuant to clause 7.1, the Supplier's contractual obligations should not extend to assisting the Authority in dealing with such claims as that may go beyond the intended scope of services. The Supplier would also not be permitted to disclose information about third parties.

71. Clause 4.1 - Would the Authority be willing to specify that insurance certificates will be an acceptable form of evidence that the Insurances are in force as per the requirements?

70. Hi, We intend to use subcontractors to deliver some services/solutions. Is it permissible to include their certifications in Part 3 Question 162 of the Selection Questionnaire (Which of the following CESG cyber certifications does your organisation currently hold)? Thank you.

69. How long does it take to get registered as a supplier after completing the SQ?

68. For questions 'Supporting commitment to develop and invest in skills, development and apprenticeships' and 'A certificate for each principal contract for goods and/or services provided in the last three years', would you please let us know the applicability and expected response?

67. Would you please let us know the required limit for professional indemnity insurance?

65. What are the legal structure options for a group of economic operators who do not wish to form a single legal entity? will a documented memorandum of understanding be sufficient?

64. Can the example contracts in Q133 be for the Private sector?

63. Hello Can you please confirm if there is a rebate for Cyber Services 3 DPS? Many thanks

61. Noting the recent amendment to include a liability cap for the indemnity provided at Core Terms 14.8, the Core Terms still provide an unlimited liability for IP and all "Applicable Laws" through clause 9.5 and 12.2. Does CCS have an appetite to provide a reasonable cap for these categories?

60. Hi Team: Thanks for the response to the clarification question on "unlimited liability for breaches of, inter alia, data, laws and IP". However, we are not able to locate in the DPS Bid Pack for the amended DPS Appointment Form V2.0, to see the updated Special Term (7), that removes the unlimited liability on Suppliers for GDPR breach and replaces it with a £10m cap. Please let us know once the new version of the DPS Appointment Form is uploaded in bid pack.

59. Please could you confirm what the value or percentage of the management fee will be?

58. We note that the definition of "Management Levy" states "the sum specified on the Platform payable by the Supplier to CCS in accordance with DPS Schedule 5 (Management Levy and Information)" however this schedule nor definition specifies the percentage value for the Levy, please can you confirm the expected value of the Levy?

57. Currently there when clicking on "view suppliers" none are listed. When will this go live please?