Škoda Accused of Influencing Helsinki Tram Tender as PK Oy Flags Serious Misconduct

Finnish transport operator PK Oy has accused Škoda Transtech of attempting to influence a major tram procurement worth more than €270 million, according to reporting by Raport Tramwajowy. Škoda allegedly pressured the company’s leadership and implied that if it failed to win the tender, other ongoing projects could be jeopardised.

The public tender for new trams in Helsinki is one of Finland’s largest urban transport investments. The contracting authority, Pääkaupunkiseudun Kaupunkiliikenne Oy (PK Oy), sought a supplier for at least 63 new trams with an option for an additional 120 units for city and suburban services. After Škoda Transtech was excluded from the process, as previously reported, only one bidder remained. Stadler was therefore selected as the winner.

Was This an Attempt to Influence the Tender?

According to Raport Tramwajowy, the most serious reason for Škoda’s exclusion was alleged improper interference in the Helsinki tender. PK Oy board chairman Eetu Kinnunen stated that Škoda invited PK Oy CEO Juha Hakavuori to an informal meeting during the evaluation phase. "The tone of the discussion suggested that if the new acquisition did not go in favour of Škoda Transtech, the trams for Kruunuvuoren would not be delivered on time," Kinnunen told public broadcaster YLE.

Hakavuori himself reported the meeting to the board, which later removed him from the decision-making process "to protect him from any suspicion", according to PK Oy. Kinnunen added that Škoda’s conduct could have jeopardised the entire procurement process: "Had Škoda Transtech won the tender, but these attempts at influence were later uncovered, there would have been strong grounds to challenge the result."

Škoda Also Failed to Meet Technical Requirements

PK Oy’s press statement stressed that the issue was not limited to the alleged attempt at influence. The authority argues that Škoda’s offer failed to meet several mandatory criteria, with the tender documentation specifying that failure to meet even one would result in automatic exclusion. "We cannot disclose the detailed technical specifications. However, we can state that Škoda’s offer did not meet all mandatory requirements," said PK Oy asset management head Antti Nousiainen.

Škoda’s proposal reportedly showed deficiencies in several areas, including braking systems, vehicle noise levels, and equipment for wheelchair users. The authority also pointed to delays in earlier projects, such as the delivery of Artic X54 vehicles, raising concerns about reliability.

Kinnunen told YLE that trust in the supplier had also been undermined by schedule issues in previous projects, including the Raide-Jokeri line and the planned Kruunuvuorenranta system. Škoda paid contractual penalties for the delays, but the company’s reputation with Finnish stakeholders appears to have suffered.

Naše tramvaj Škoda ForCity Smart Artic X54 je oficiálně v provozu! Svou premiérovou jízdu zahájila na trase Helsinky - Espoo. Tato tramvaj z rodiny Artic se může pochlubit unikátním systémem Kneeling, umístěným ve středovém modulu, díky kterému nabízí 100% bezbariérový přístup. pic.twitter.com/11dKj9mI3b

— Škoda Group CZ (@SkodaGroupCZ) October 23, 2023

Škoda Calls the Decision Discriminatory

Škoda stated in a press release that the comments referenced only public information and did not meet the legal criteria for excluding a bidder. The company claims the contracting authority treated routine media remarks as a sign of competitive distortion, thereby limiting fair access to the tender. "Every tender should be a true competition. Excluding one of the offers after two years of procurement undermines the basic principles of an equal and fair tender," said Škoda Group CEO Petr Novotný.

Škoda has appealed the decision to the Finnish Market Court, calling the procedure "unfair, non-transparent and discriminatory". The company argues that its bid met all technical requirements and that the alleged shortcomings were purely formal and could have been clarified.

The Finnish Contracting Authority Stands by its Decision

Škoda further insists that delays in other contracts cannot, under Finnish law, be a basis for exclusion from a new tender. "The procurement process must allow fair competition. In this case, we were excluded on incorrect and unsubstantiated grounds," Novotný said.

The Finnish Market Court is now reviewing the complaint. It will assess whether PK Oy followed procurement law and whether the exclusion was justified. The ruling could affect not only this contract but also the wider perception of Finland’s openness to foreign suppliers. PK Oy maintains that the process followed all legal requirements and that its priority is "to ensure the highest quality and reliability for passengers in Helsinki."

Source: Raport Tramwajowy