Unable to pay funeral costs at triple fees.

viktory

Marisco wrote: »

It's amazing what you learn on these boards!!!! I had no idea that they could charge extra, if you don't live in the place you want to be buried!!!!!! It's outrageous!!:mad:

I don't think it is outrageous at all.

Deep_Ocean wrote: »

Longer than the two years requirement. Maybe 15-20 years.

Really? That really negates the whole 'he was local' argument.

Deep_Ocean

Well thank you for your contribution Viktory. I see that you deliberately eliminated the ‘5 miles’ from your quote.

If you think of your neighbouring village, it will probably be the same distance. So it wasn’t the most intelligent post. 15-20 years has no correlation to the locality, you don’t drift further away the longer you have lived in your home. He was always just a short walk away from his family. This would have been the case whether he had lived there 1 year or 100 years.

But thank you for your contribution all the same.

parsons

As I have said before, thank goodness all of my family burials have taken place in consecrated ground at the village church where all weddings, baptisms and funerals have taken place for all the family since the early 1800's. The church does not place any obstacles as to residency, times etc. All it accepts is that the family, now some 300/400 miles distant from each other, have the right to bury their dead in the place that they consider to be the family seat. There isn't any question of more money to be paid to the church depending on where they last lived. We, the family own the plots and have the title deeds that guarantee our last resting place.
Incidentally all of the deeds for the plots has been handed down through the generations to the eldest surviving male of the line. Currently I am that person.

Thank goodness the council have no say in church matters!!

danaharrison

im sorry to hear of your loss hun, i would seek legal advice, if yout nan had agreed a price with the undertaker then one would think they cant just up it.

viktory

Deep_Ocean wrote: »

Well thank you for your contribution Viktory. I see that you deliberately eliminated the ‘5 miles’ from your quote.

No, I deliberately left the five miles bit out, because outside the area is outside the area. Doesn't matter if it is 1 mile or 101 miles - and I think this is the stand the council will take. You might not like what I have said, but at least if I have said it, you can think about it and come up with better argument than "Yeah, but it was only just outside!"

Deep_Ocean

viktory wrote: »

You might not like what I have said, but at least if I have said it, you can think about it and come up with better argument than "Yeah, but it was only just outside!"

If you had read the thread properly you would have read that the distance is not the asguement here.

Deep_Ocean wrote: »

I have had an in depth look over the entire sequence of events.
1.The death was registered on 15th December 2010 which states his demise at 14th December.
2.An invoice was received on 15th December for a total cost of £4,000. This invoice clearly states the address of the deceased.
3.On 21st December a letter was sent out confirming the funeral date of 5th January. Attached to this letter was a similar invoice to the previous showing a total cost of nearly £4,000.
4.On 23rd December we all contacted the newspaper and paid them to publish our tributes and notification of the funeral details.
5.A letter was also sent out which was dated 23rd December. This was received after the Christmas Holiday period due to public bank holidays. This letter stated the revised fees of £6620.
6.My objection is not to the law but to how the rules but the fact that we were not notified until it was too late. We had already put a notification in the paper before receiving the revised invoice.

7.Section 4.2 of South Staffordshire Council Bereavement Rules and Regulations clearly states that “Families of non-residents of South Staffordshire who wish their relatives to be interred at Sytch Lane Cemetery need to be made aware of the premium fees.” I do not believe that we were made aware of the fees in a timely manner.

This is my argument.

danaharrison wrote: »

im sorry to hear of your loss hun, i would seek legal advice, if yout nan had agreed a price with the undertaker then one would think they cant just up it.

Thank you danaharrison. I have written a lengthy detailed letter to the Bereavement Manager of the council, and I have also written a letter to the MP enclosing a copy of my other letter. If I am not satisfied with the outcome I will write to the press and seek legal action.

Thank you all for your posts, good and bad, other opinions from both sides of the argument do help one to reach a balanced conclusion.

I can understand the reason behind the law, but it should also be discressionary, whereby somebody with strong ties to the area should be given some consideration. This is the moral premise.

On the legal side of things, had we been made aware of the triple fees in the first instance we wouldn't have an argument, but as the family had spent collectively over £100 on tributes and notifications in the paper, before being made aware of the triple fees. This is where my focus lies.