Dear Mr N.,

On 2 March 2000, you made a complaint to the European Ombudsman about alleged failure by the European Commission to pay the second instalment due under a contract for a project under the Leonardo da Vinci programme "Training Module for Waste Management for SMEs – FIN/96/2/1129/P1/II.1.1.a./CONT".

On 17 May 2000, I forwarded the complaint to the President of the European Commission. On 7 November 2000, the Commission sent an opinion on your complaint and I forwarded it to you with an invitation to make observations. No observations appear to have been received from you.

I am writing now to let you know the results of the inquiries that have been made.

THE COMPLAINT

The project "Training Module for Waste Management for SMEs – FIN/96/2/1129/P1/II.1.1.a./CONT" began on 2 December 1996 and the Commission paid the first instalment on time. In accordance with the contract, the complainant submitted the interim report on 31 August 1998. Under the contract, the payment of the second instalment should have been made within two months of the approval of the interim report. According to the complainant, the Commission has not requested any further information from the complainant, but has not paid the second instalment.

The complainant claims:

1. immediate payment of € 58 500 due under the contract
2. the following general improvements in the procedure to be followed in future cases:

• the Commission should notify receipt of the final report to the contractor immediately;
• consideration of the final report should be completed within two months from its receipt;
• the contractor should be asked for any additional information without delay once the consideration of the report is completed.

THE INQUIRY

The Commission's opinion

In its opinion the Commission made in summary the following points:

As regards project FIN/96/1129, the interim report of the project was sent to the Commission in August 1998. Within the Leonardo da Vinci Programme a technical assistance office evaluated the interim reports. The technical assistance office made an analysis on the contents and financial information of the reports. The latter analysis had not yet been finalised when the Commission informed that it will not renew its contract with the company governing the technical assistance office. In order to guarantee continuity and management of the on-going projects the Commission created a special unit called CLEO. In practice, for many different reasons the Commission was only able to take over the management in May 1999. The Commission had to solve many problems in relation to the management of the programme. CLEO finalised the analysis of the interim report in July 1999.

After the closure of the technical assistance office Belgian authorities prevented access to the files held by that office. Eventually, after the files were returned to the Commission, it found out that some documents were missing. As the contract relating to the project in question was missing, the contracting party was asked to provide a copy of the contract. This explains the length of time it took to complete the analysis.

Due to the encountered problems, the Commission services needed to change their methods of payment and therefore there were delays in the payments. A final agreement was made between the Units on 30 March 2000 and the payment was sent on 5 April 2000 to the Commission’s bank. The payment has already been made and a letter of closure including information on all payments was sent in July 2000.

As regards the financial agreement on the final payment, the Commission explained that within the framework of Leonardo da Vinci I programme the final payment is made 60 days after the contracting party has presented the final report and after the Commission has approved that report.

In November 1999 the contracting party requested for an extension of the deadline to present the final report and the Commission extended the deadline until 30 March 2000. The Commission services received the final report on 3 April 2000 and an acknowledgement of receipt was sent on 4 May 2000. On 4 September 2000, the Commission services sent a request for further information to the contracting party. On 12 October 2000, the contracting party sent a reply. The Commission informed the Ombudsman that the evaluation would be finalised shortly and the payment will be made within 60 of the receipt of these documents according to the contract.

The Commission informed that in the Guidelines concerning the Commission payment times published on 19 July 2000 it has taken up problems raised by the complainant particularly in point VI.B.2 of the Guidelines.

The complainant’s observations

The complainant has not sent any observations.

THE DECISION

1 Alleged failure to pay the second instalment

1.1 The complainant alleged that the Commission had not made the second instalment of € 58 500which was due.

1.2 In its opinion the Commission has explained that the delays in the handling of the second instalment are partly due to the decision not to renew the contract of the company governing the technical assistance office and partly to loss of documents and the decision to change the methods of payment. The Commission has informed the Ombudsman that the payment of the second instalment has been made to the complainant.

1.3 Based on the Ombudsman inquiries there appears to be no maladministration in relation to this aspect of the case.

2 Suggested general improvements in the procedure

2.1 The complainant suggested that the Commission should notify receipt of the final report to the contractor immediately and that consideration of the final report should be completed within two months from receipt. Finally, the complainant suggested the contractor should be asked for any additional information without delay once the consideration of the report is completed.

2.2 The Ombudsman observes that the Commission has explained that the suggestions made by the complainant have been taken into account in the Guidelines concerning the Commission payment times published on 19 July 2000. Point VI.B.2 of the Guidelines concerns measures to reduce payment times. In the decision of the European Ombudsman in the own initiative inquiry into the subject of late payments by the Commission (OI/5/99/IJH) the Ombudsman took the view that the steps proposed or already undertaken by the Commission, if properly implemented, are likely to represent a considerable progress towards combating the problem of late payment by the Commission.

3 Conclusion

On the basis of the Ombudsman’s inquiries into this complaint, there appears to have been no maladministration by the Commission. The Ombudsman therefore closes the case.

The President of the Commission will also be informed of this decision.

Yours sincerely,

 

Jacob SÖDERMAN