The Scottish Mail on Sunday

We must lay to rest rotten funeral market by Jeff Prestridge

- PERSONAL FINANCE EDITOR jeff.prestridge@mailonsund­ay.co.uk

Should you use a price comparison website to find a cheaper funeral? FOCUS: Our story in 2018

ALTHOUGH it works at a pace resembling that of an infirm snail, the Competitio­n & Markets Authority is spot on with its decision to probe into the rotten underbelly of the funerals market.

An industry that is meant to be there for us when loved ones depart, emotions run high and minds wander. But all too often – not always – a sector that ruthlessly exploits the grieving by charging them the earth to lay loved ones to rest. A dysfunctio­nal market where price inflation is rampant – six per cent per annum for the past 14 years – and competitio­n minimal. Where some operators get away with financial murder. Shocking, sickening, egregious behaviour.

Having sought opinion from a mix of consumer groups, funeral directors, insurers, Uncle Tom Cobley and all, the authority will now assess what action it needs to take to make the funerals market fit for purpose. Overseen by retired lawyer Martin Coleman (ex-Norton Rose Fulbright), a group of the great and good drawn from the authority’s panel of independen­t members will come up with a battle plan.

I trust navel-gazing will be kept to a minimum and Coleman delivers quickly. After all, it is glaringly obvious the market is broken, in need of an urgent shake-up and greater regulatory oversight (we have been saying so for the past two years).

The fact the industry does not have in situ an independen­t Ombudsman to look at unresolved complaints against businesses is indicative of a mentality more resembling the Gunfight at the OK Corral than one focused on best serving the needs of customers.

As a bare minimum, funeral directors must be required to disclose all their prices – in marketing material and online – in a heavily prescribed form. Nothing should be hidden and the bereaved must be informed of all options available so they can then make an informed choice. Any business failing to disclose all prices should be fined – and shut down if it persists. Such a prescripti­ve regime would also allow those who wish to do so to compare the prices of local funeral

directors, thereby ensuring they are paying a fair price.

It is also essential the authority does everything possible to promote the virtues of price comparison websites that allow the bereaved to shop around for funeral providers.

Currently, the market leader is Beyond. It has done excellent work – often using somewhat ‘controvers­ial’ marketing – in highlighti­ng the range in prices charged by directors for the same funeral package. Sometimes, there is a difference of £1,000 between the cheapest and most expensive provider – evidence if any was needed that many bereaved people are being ripped off. The fact this disruptor is reviled by many funeral operators is another indication it is shining a brilliant spotlight on profiteeri­ng.

While Coleman cogitates, anyone in need of more informatio­n on how best to go about arranging a funeral should take a look at a document produced by charity Age UK, the Money Advice Service and the CMA. It is available at https://www.gov. uk/cma-cases/funerals-marketstud­y#funerals-advice HATS off to Sharon White, boss of communicat­ions regulator Ofcom, for introducin­g a scheme requiring most broadband and landline providers to automatica­lly compensate customers who fall victim to poor service.

Launched tomorrow, it means customers will receive prescribed compensati­on for a variety of wrongs – a ‘broken’ landline or broadband service not being fixed within two days, an engineer not turning up or cancelling at short notice, or a new service not starting on an agreed date. Compensati­on will respective­ly be £8 for each day the service is not repaired, £25 per missed appointmen­t and £5 per day of delay.

BT, Sky, TalkTalk, Virgin Media and Zen Internet are on board from day one. Ofcom says customers could receive automatic compensati­on totalling £142million a year as a result of the new regime.

No doubt providers will pass on the cost through higher bills (see page 110) but the scheme is a step forward.

 ??  ??
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom