Friend's son died, family can't afford funeral costs

Bogof_Babe

I don't understand why funerals have to be so costly. It's not like a wedding, when everything is expected to be to be showy and extravagant.

I would be interested to know how much a "basic council funeral" differs from a funeral that people have paid several thousand pounds for.

Cars and flowers presumably, but apart from a hearse there's no need to pay for those. You can make your own order of service leaflets. From my experiences the actual ceremony is always pretty basic.

Is it the actual disposal of the body, i.e. burial or cremation, that costs a lot? Surely this would be the same for individual or for the council, except I suppose the council have an agreement with the crematorium?

Has anyone ever been to a "basic council funeral"? Are they as grim as they are being made out to be?

densol_2

Bogof - I agree. Ive got money but ive told my kids not to waste it on some fancy wooden/ brass handled box thats going in the ground. They know to bury me in a carboard eco casket but ensure theres enough drink and food for a good party in my name

melanzana

densol wrote: »

There is NO requirement from a relative to pay. Its not about weeding out those who 'could' The only money relevant is money in the deceased estate.

Thanks.

But I do think the Council will check thoroughly anyway where there is NO estate. They are duty bound to see if relatives are in a financial position to pay for the funeral. But many cannot or will not.

There may be relatives around who COULD pay but will not.

So what is the answer there?

It happens, make no mistake.

Mojisola

TELLIT01 wrote: »

If it's anything like friends experience of the LA / hospital they will use every trick in the book to try to apply pressure on the family to pay.

The LA and the hospital have a duty to make sure that there isn't someone in the family who would pay for the funeral before they spend taxpayers' money.

Some officials might overstep the mark but they do need to make sure there isn't anything belonging to the deceased which could go towards the cost or any family members who are able (and willing) to pay.

TELLIT01

Mojisola wrote: »

The LA and the hospital have a duty to make sure that there isn't someone in the family who would pay for the funeral before they spend taxpayers' money.

Some officials might overstep the mark but they do need to make sure there isn't anything belonging to the deceased which could go towards the cost or any family members who are able (and willing) to pay.

I accept that, but in the situation I refer to above there were numerous calls attempting to apply pressure on the sister to pay for the funeral of a man who had bled their mother dry. The callers didn't care about anything other than the money despite having full knowledge of the situation.

Mojisola

Mojisola wrote: »

Some officials might overstep the mark

TELLIT01 wrote: »

I accept that, but in the situation I refer to above there were numerous calls attempting to apply pressure on the sister to pay for the funeral of a man who had bled their mother dry. The callers didn't care about anything other than the money despite having full knowledge of the situation.

So definitely a case of officials going further than they should have done.

Silvertabby

“ There is NO requirement from a relative to pay. Its not about weeding out those who 'could' The only money relevant is money in the deceased estate.
Originally posted by densol

Thanks.

But I do think the Council will check thoroughly anyway where there is NO estate. They are duty bound to see if relatives are in a financial position to pay for the funeral. But many cannot or will not.

There may be relatives around who COULD pay but will not.

So what is the answer there?

It happens, make no mistake.

There are family members who will put themselves into debt in order to give a loved one a good send off, and there are family members who will just refuse to pay anything.

I'm a retired LGPS pensions administrator and remember one particularly sad case a few years ago. An elderly lady in receipt of a LGPS widows pension died in a nursing home. The home administrator rang to advise us of her death and, as she had no family, to ask if there were any pension benefits due which could be used to help pay for her funeral. As the pension ended on her death, and in the absence of any family or close friends (she'd been in the nursing home for over 5 years but had never had a single visitor), the home administrator advised that the Council would pay for the funeral. That would have been the end of the story - except less than 3 months after her death the lady's daughter rang to ask if there were any residual pension payments due that could be paid to her.

Glen_Clark

Bear in mind the size of the funeral and number of mourners bears no relationship to the quality of the deceased. You only have to look at Sir Jimmy Savile's funeral to see that. Or Ronnie Kray. Massive hugely expensive ceremonies for total a**holes.
So there is certainly nothing to be ashamed of in a simple funeral.

teddysmum

I don't care what they do with me when I'm gone, but would like as little as possible spent, as I hate wasting money.

Mojisola

teddysmum wrote: »

I don't care what they do with me when I'm gone, but would like as little as possible spent, as I hate wasting money.

Having been to half a dozen family funerals over the last few years, I don't think the money spent on any of them was wasted.

It's easy to talk about "just put me out with the rubbish" when you're fit and well but having a well-organised and respectful funeral helps those who are grieving.