Death Care Law Blog : Kansas Death Care and Preneed Lawyer & Attorney : Stalter Legal Services Law Firm : Funeral Law, Elder Law : Kansas City

When funeral arrangements are made subsequent to the death of a family member, the meeting with a funeral director can be very emotional. Addressing the paperwork required by law often adds to the stress of the arrangement meeting. Sensitive to the individual needs of the family, funeral directors attempt to balance legal requirements with the emotional state of the individual who controls the deceased’s disposition.

The funeral director’s arrangement paperwork is defined principally by the Federal Trade Commission’s Funeral Rule. The Funeral Rule requires that the goods and services selected at the conclusion of the meeting be itemized with costs. The intent is then to allow the individual to evaluate the selections so that he/she can make any desired changes.

Funeral homes must also comply with the Funeral Rule when selling funeral arrangements on a preneed basis. For guaranteed contracts, this would mean that an itemization statement may be incorporated by the preneed contract. To cut down on the paperwork prepared at the time of death, a funeral director may be tempted to resort to the statement of goods and services used for the preneed contract. While this practice is not prohibited by the Funeral Rule, several factual circumstances would make the practice a violation of the Rule.

The FTC website includes “Recent Funeral Rule Opinions”. The opinions include explanations about various fact situations that impact how the statement of goods and services must be prepared. For example, if the preneed contract includes cash advance funds, the funeral director must consider whether the original statement’s descriptions are still accurate. If the family changes any of the original selections (for example, a different casket is chosen), a new statement must be prepared. If the original statement includes a generic description of a casket, it may not comply with the Funeral Rule.

Using the preneed statement may seem a convenience in saving time and minimizing the stress of the arrangement meeting, but the better business practice would be to prepare a new statement of goods and services. The new statement of goods and services also serves to document the funeral home’s compliance with the terms of the preneed contract. With preneed audits looming in various states, funeral directors may regret the time they attempted to save in the arrangement meeting.

Depending upon Congress, theBereaved Consumer’s Bill of Rights Act of 2009 may impose the same Funeral Rule on cemeteries.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The fear of SB1 drove the Missouri cemetery industry to push for Chapter 214 legislation in 2009, only to have the wheels come off at the stroke of midnight last May. While legislation was passed, the original bill was gutted, and the resulting changes were incoherent and confusing. It was no surprise that the industry would pursue a bill to correct what was done in 2009.

An industry bill was introduced in the 2010 session as SB754. However, that bill was quickly replaced by a Senate Committee Substitute. The substitute bill incorporates changes sought by the State, the speed in which the bill was produced signals regulators’ recognition that Chapter 214 reform is needed.

Over the next several weeks, the death care industry and consumers need to take a close look at SCS SB754. Legislators will only provide the parties so many attempts to ‘get it right’. And while this bill contains several needed changes, it also has provisions that beg for questions, and answers. Take preneed for an example.

Section 214.387 will govern how the cemetery industry is to sell preneed in Missouri. Prior to last year’s legislation, Chapter 214 provided minimal oversight of preneed sales of markers and services. If a cemetery wanted to sell a vault on a preneed basis, it had to comply with Chapter 436. Chapter 214 did not contemplate trust funded preneed.

Section 214.387 takes a page from the ‘old’ version of Chapter 436 by requiring Missouri cemeteries to deposit 80% of a consumer’s payments to an escrow account or a trust if the preneed contract defers delivery. Last year’s model of 214.387 first established the new trusting requirement, but did so with confusing language. So in a sense, Missouri cemeteries went from zero to eighty last year without guidelines.

SCS SB754 attempts to provide some of those guidelines, but it misses a few beats.

The 80% trusting requirement will be one of the highest in the country. Many states’ cemetery laws trust on the wholesale costs of merchandise. This poses an audit nightmare (ask the Kansas Secretary of State). The wholesale threshold is crossed somewhere around 40 to 50% of retail. Consequently, the cemetery laws generally have lower trusting requirements than that imposed on funeral homes. But the second piece of the puzzle for cemetery trusting is the income accrual provisions.

Cemeteries have cash flow requirements that differ from that of a funeral home. States’ cemetery laws reflect this by permitting the disbursement of preneed trust income. Typically, the higher the trusting percentage, the more likely income disbursements will be allowed. But, there are exceptions (Iowa for example).

So, it’s no surprise that 214.387 contemplates income distributions. However, the bill only authorizes income disbursements from escrow accounts. The bill does not include a corresponding authority for preneed trusts.

Another glitch in 214.387 would provide consumers a refund that would include half of the income earned on the account. If escrow accounts are distributing income to cemeteries, then someone would have to ‘come out of pocket’ for refunds to the consumer.

The quick solution to these 214.387 issues would be to allow both types of accounts to distribute half the annual income, leaving the balance of income in the account until the contract is canceled or performed. As such, the Missouri law would provide higher trusting safeguards than most other states.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In terms of the toxic NPS fallout, Texas ranks a close second to Missouri.  In response, the Texas Department of Banking has released a legislative proposal aimed at closing what it perceives are the loopholes in Chapter 154 of the Texas Finance Code. 

To facilitate discussion of the issues with death care operators, insurance companies and fiduciaries, the Department of Banking released an Explanation of Intent of Proposed Changes.   A few of the DOB issues include:

• Putting cemeteries on notice that they could be defined as a "funeral provider".
• The seller/permit holder must exercise reasonable controls over contract administration.
• The elimination of third-party preneed sellers.
• A minimum net worth of $100,000 for permit holders.
• A standard information brochure that covers both forms of funding.
• Income allocation requirements for non-guaranteed items.
• Distribution documentation.
• A new guaranty fund.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks