While most people fret about the high cost of living, sooner or later most of us have to deal with the often exorbitant cost of burying a loved one.
Some persons who recently have had to deal with excessive funeral expenses vented their frustration on the social media. As expected, it opened a Pandora’s Box of alleged abuses by those involved in the funeral trade.
It seems that the most rampant abuse is the ‘informal’ method of demanding payment where expenses are jotted on a piece of paper rather than a fiscal invoice that should indicate the amount of VAT payable for the services given.
It is a worrying reality that suppliers of services often give their clients an option of not paying VAT, as long as they do not insist on a fiscal receipt.
This alleged widespread practice deprives clients of the right of complaining to a competent authority if they feel that they have been overcharged.
Another abusive practice that is often undetected by distressed relatives of a deceased person is the lack of a detailed breakdown of funeral expenses by the undertaker demanding payment for his services. Moreover, at times, relatives of recently-deceased persons are mis-sold funeral services that are not really necessary. This is no more than a ruthless exploitation of people in distress when they are most vulnerable.
But what most people find disgraceful is the collusion between healthcare professionals and the funeral trade when it becomes evident that a sick patient in one of our hospitals is nearing the end of his/her life.
John Bray, president of the Malta Hearses Association, admitted that some funeral directors abuse the system, even approaching relatives before their loved ones have passed away.
This apparently not uncommon practice is causing great distress to the relatives of dying persons as they feel like helpless prey being attacked by vultures.
The hospital authorities have a big obligation of ensuring that patients are treated with dignity while still alive and even more so when they pass away. Similar respect is owed to the relatives of these same patients.
The Consumers’ Association contends that the government cannot interfere with the issue of prices.
While one tends to agree that fixing of prices in the funeral trade, which operates under competitive conditions, is uncalled for, many argue that the government can do more to protect consumers, for instance, by publishing the average fees that are normally charged for such services.
Such published fees could serve as benchmarks for anyone wanting to avoid the hassle of shopping around and bargaining for a fair deal at a time when one is most likely to be distressed.
The media can also have an important role in informing the public about the way to deal with ‘funeral vultures’ by publishing information that will help people manage the maze of dealing with funeral arrangements following some incisive investigative journalism.
It must be acknowledged that, as long as people continue to prefer to avoid paying tax when procuring services, they could easily become victims of unscrupulous operators who exploit every opportunity to maximise their profits knowing that their clients would be discouraged from complaining to the relevant authorities.
Moreover, as in all other aspects of consumer protection, education is the best tool to combat profiteering by unscrupulous funeral directors.
The best way to prepare for events of this sort is to research how best to manage such stressful situations before they actually occur.