The last time the Missouri State Board of Embalmers and Funeral Directors took up the issue of preneed seller record keeping requirements, the staff proposal emphasized a contract ledger approach.  The proposal sought to require a contract record that reflected the amount and date of each payment received and the corresponding dates and amounts

Two years ago, the Missouri State Board of Embalmers and Funeral Directors met in Independence to discuss their staff’s recommendations for seller record keeping requirements and the scope of preneed examinations.  As the minutes somewhat reflect, the staff proposals were met with strong public opposition.   (This blog documented those issues in prior posts that

This time last year, the hot topic before the Missouri State Board of Embalmers and Funeral Directors was the staff’s proposed regulation to define what constitutes adequate records of a preneed seller.   The proposal was revised more than once during 2016, but it was eventually tabled by the Board before any consensus could be reached.  

The next claim made in the Missouri State Board Complaint against the Missouri Funeral Trust is that the program is holding funds for preneed contracts that have either been serviced or canceled.   The Complaint cites Section 436.456 as legally requiring the MFT trustee to distribute an account’s funds when it receives documentation that the contract

Paragraph 26c of the Complaint filed by the Missouri State Board of Embalmers and Funeral Directors alleges that the Missouri Funeral Trust fails to maintain “records regarding the insurance policies for insurance funded preneed contracts….”  We suspect this claim may be directed at a practice where the MFT trustee has accommodated funeral homes that have

Paragraph 26b of the Complaint filed by the Missouri State Board of Embalmers and Funeral Directors alleges that the Missouri Funeral Trust fails to maintain “records that explain why the principal held in trust exceeds the face value of the preneed contract associated with that account…”  We anticipate that this claim is considering the contract