I mean, I'm guessing they're hedging their bets on wording because while it sounds like they're pretty sure they've got accurate logs, I imagine the last thing they want to do is say "people who were sole bidders on housing plots will get the house" and then discover there's some deeper layer of the bug where some houses were listed as sole bidders but actually had, say, two people bidding; the logs might be accurate and say there were two bids in such a case, but maybe both people who bid saw "1 bid" on the placard when they made their bids.
I mean, I kind of doubt that's actually a bug they're going to encounter, but were I in their shoes I'd still be awfully cautious about saying anything too definite until the investigation of What The Heck Went Wrong finishes. If they said "sole bidders will be awarded the house" and then came out and said "turns out some of you weren't sole bidders, so the drawing for those plots will be run again", people would be foaming at the mouth and setting things on fire. (More than they already are.)
What I suspect they will do is not allow new bids, restore bids for people who withdrew money, and then re-run the drawing for the broken plots; that's at least how I would handle it. That way, if someone was a sole bidder yes, they'd get the house... but if there was some secondary bug where it displayed "1 bid" on the placard when there were actually two bids, there'd still be a fair chance for either bidder to get the house. (And they wouldn't have to special-case anything, like handling sole bids differently or whatnot.)
