Family response to the insulting letter from the NSW Funeral Directors Association

Using the phrase business ethics might imply that the ethical rules and expectations are somehow different in business than in other contexts. There really is no such thing as business ethics. There is just ethics and the challenge for people in business and every other walk in life to acknowledge and live up to basic moral principles like honesty, respect, responsibility, fairness and caring.

Michael Josephson

Grief and trauma are hard enough to process. But these added layers of cruelty and unethical practices caused compounded trauma. We were shocked by the written letter from the NSW Funeral Directors Association. Again refer to the previous post to read the letter (http://mystory-myvoice.blogspot.com/2024/08/nsw-funeral-directors-association.html) and the Code of Ethics members are expected to abide by (https://www.fdansw.com.au/code-of-ethics.html). Clearly, they don’t. Apart from membership fees, I can only speculate if there was possibly something more, to result in my family being sent such a deceitful, dishonest, patronising, disrespectful, unprofessional, unethical (by the standards of this association’s own code of ethics) and inhumane letter. 

When will the Federal Government finally review the so called religious “privileges” of registered non-profit organisations with the Australian Charities and Non-Profit Commission? Why are they exempt from the same transparency, fairness, compliance and accountability? What do they have to hide, if they are ethical and honest institutions? 

The trauma from this shocking letter was so intense, it took several years for my family to reply. How, then, can such a prolonged process of repeated inhumanity and brazen misconduct, especially from businesses and their association in an industry like this, have a timeline expectation placed on grieving families, to resolve this matter within the statute of limitations? I repeat the wise words of Troy Stolz: in Australia, we have a “legal” system, not a “justice” system. 

The response letter is dated 20 February 2020. 

This was my family’s reply to that pathetic letter that was full of ignorance and disrespect, from the NSW Funeral Directors Association. 

THE FUNERAL DIRECTORS' ASSOCIATION OF NSW LTD. E secretary@fdansw.com.au W www.fdansw.com.au P +61 1800 613913 F +61 2 8078 3825 Address Suite 4G, 9 Redmyre Road Strathfield NSW Post PO Box 270, Strathfield NSW 2135 

Mr Cividin, 

When I first called you and discussed our problem with you, you came across as 1) very understanding, and 2) quite shocked, that one of your member organisations (Acropolis Funerals) did not carry out our wishes for my father’s funeral as requested by us and as recorded on the ‘Funeral Agreement’ (Contract). Your exact words included such terms and phrases as “unacceptable”, “we can’t have things like that going on”, and “what is in a contract is binding”. You told me that you took three pages of notes as I was speaking with you, and, of course, I sent you all documents pertaining to this matter (including a copy of the Funeral Contract) as requested by you. 

Following your meeting with Vicky Kiriazis (Director) of Acropolis Funerals, you seem to have made a 180 degree turn from your original stance, concerning your position in this serious matter. For some reason, both you and your board have completely ignored the Funeral Contract and the letters of complaint we brought to your attention, and have simply found Acropolis Funerals to be innocent of any wrongdoing, even though Vicky Kiriazis has admitted (indirectly) that there was a serious breach of contract concerning my father's funeral. As far as my family and I are concerned, her excuses are an admission of wrongdoing from the side of Acropolis Funerals, and we cannot understand why you, Mr Cividin, have chosen to turn a blind eye to this. 

This matter is so clear and simple, that you did in fact tell me on the phone (off the record) that "Acropolis Funerals did not do what was asked of them by the next of kin", therefore clearly indicating that they are in breach of contract, which, of course, constitutes professional misconduct. Now, why you chose to put the basic facts of this case to the side, and send us the totally ridiculous and shocking response that you did is anybody's guess. Your response to us (following what you have called your "investigation" into this matter) defies both logic and explanation. It has become apparent to us, that your so called "investigation" was more of a little conversation (like a small chat) with Acropolis Funerals. In a desperate attempt to cover or excuse or justify their professional misconduct, Acropolis Funerals resorted to lying through their teeth, and you, Mr Cividin, have accepted their lies as facts, thus adding to the serious emotional injury and pain inflicted upon us by Acropolis Funerals. I will now respond to each of your points one by one: 

1) There is absolutely no Greek custom or tradition that a priest (and other people of his choice) be included in a funeral cortege! A priest does not have the right to demand a funeral car for himself (and other people of his choice) for a funeral procession, a priest does not have the right to demand that he (and other people of his choice) be included in a funeral procession, and a funeral business certainly does not have the right to provide a car for anyone (priest or lay person) against the explicit and specific instructions and wishes of the next of kin.

* Please be informed that I hold two tertiary qualifications in theology (undergraduate and postgraduate) so I am very well-educated in what is and what is not Greek custom concerning funerals. Also, for the past three decades I have not only attended, but actively participated in countless Greek Orthodox funeral services (including my own father's funeral), and I will have you know that what Acropolis Funerals did has nothing to do with Greek custom or tradition. What they did was engage in highly unethical and unprofessional behaviour for which they must be held to account. The fact that the priest in question (and six other people) were estranged relatives is irrelevant to this matter. If we wanted relatives or friends in the funeral cortege we would have requested a car for them, and this would have been recorded in the 'Funeral Agreement'. The 'Funeral Agreement' clearly shows that we wanted only one sedan for three people (the immediate family). Acropolis Funerals disrespected and ignored this very clear and simple instruction; 

*A brief look at Australian laws governing funerals and funeral arrangements has revealed to me the following: If the deceased person did not legally designate someone to make decisions regarding their funeral arrangements, it falls to the next of kin, which is the closest blood-related family member (or spouse). Funeral homes only need one blood-related family member to be present while making arrangements. Once that family member steps up and takes responsibility for both making and paying for the funeral arrangements, they sign a legal contract which obligates the funeral home to follow the instructions of that family member alone. ... The funeral home is legally bound to the contract made with the family member that took initial responsibility for both making and paying for the arrangements. Australian law also clearly states that the person with the right to control the funeral and burial arrangements of the deceased (the right of disposal) is the person most likely to be awarded the right to administer the deceased's estate. The order of priority for administering an estate is found in the common law in Victoria and WA. In all other states and territories, the order is governed by statute. At common law, the order of priority is: a) spouse or domestic partner of the deceased; b) children of the deceased or, if the children are not yet 18 years of age, the children's guardian; c) adoptive parents of the deceased; d) biological parents of the deceased; e) foster parents of the deceased; f) extended family of the deceased; g) householder of the premises in which the deceased passed away. 

2) Mr Cividin, I find it deplorable that both you and Acropolis Funerals are using my politeness at the time of my father's death against me in this matter, and, according to you, as a kind of affirmation on my behalf that everything that was said at that time was fine, and that everything that was done at that time was fine. It is clear to me that both you and Acropolis Funerals have no idea about or understanding of what happens to a family when they lose a loved one to suicide. At that time of unspeakable shock, my family and I were surviving on autopilot. I was doing two things: a) What do I need to get done? ; and b) Just say "thank you" to everyone no matter what they say and/or do. For example, there were people who were telling us that my father had committed a grave sin for which he would go to hell, and I would just say "thank you very much for everything." So, with Acropolis Funerals, I thought "what do I need to do?", - pay for the funeral in the timeframe given, "what do I need to say?", - thank you very much for everything. You, Mr Cividin, and Acropolis Funerals need to realise that when something like this happens to a family, the family only begins to process what has happened, what has been said, and what has been done, months (if not years) later, hence our first letter of complaint to Acropolis Funerals months later on the 14/06/2010; 

3) On 14/06/2010 we sent a letter of complaint to Acropolis Funerals regarding the fact that they provided seven people with a car for the funeral cortege without our knowledge, consent, and authorisation, and against our explicit instruction for one sedan for three people (the immediate family). We requested a written explanation concerning this matter. Acropolis Funerals refused to provide us with a written explanation concerning this matter. Instead, late one night, the Funeral Director of Acropolis Funerals called us on the phone, and made matters worse. The Funeral Director said, and I quote verbatim, "your priest relative demanded the car be ready for him and six other people on the morning of the funeral", "I know that priest through work I do for him", "I had to respect the wishes of a priest over and above the wishes of the next of kin", "I had no choice in the matter", "I respected your family by giving those people their car for free." The phone call became a serious and acrimonious exchange of words, as there was no way I could communicate with this person. At the end of the phone call with this person I screamed in distress at the top of my lungs "I'll see you in court over this", and then handed the phone to my sister. I was completely devastated by the audacity of the Funeral Director and just couldn't believe what I was hearing. My sister tried to speak with this person, tried to get to the bottom of the matter, and finally had to hang up the phone, because she was left drowning in the agony of her own tears. Yet again, Mr Cividin, you have accepted the blatant lies of someone at Acropolis Funerals as fact. Where you get "at the end of the conversation all appeared to have been sorted out to both parties' acknowledgement", is anybody's guess; 

4) Mr Cividin, I am not going to repeat myself for your benefit. Refer to point number 1; 

5) Mr Cividin, considering the many lies Acropolis Funerals has come up with to cover their professional misconduct, I believe they are lying about not receiving our letter to them dated 21/02/2011. However, even if I give them the benefit of the doubt, the fact of the matter is a) in this letter we clearly asked that they not contact us at all as we would be escalating the matter by forwarding it to the relevant authorities; and b) they did receive our first letter to them dated 14/06/2010 and refused to respond in writing which is what we requested; 

6) Mr Cividin, you say that "... a lesson learned from this would be that if a complaint is received in writing that the complaint should be answered in writing, which would appear to have never been done (by Acropolis Funerals) other than over the phone soon after the letter dated June 14, 2010 was received." Mr Cividin, be informed that Acropolis Funerals has still not responded to our complaint in writing. Evidently, Acropolis Funerals has not learned anything from this matter; 

7) Mr Cividin, the final comments to us in your letter are nothing less than patronising and condescending, not to mention shockingly dismissive of the basic facts of this matter. On the record you have written that in your view Acropolis Funerals "have nothing to answer for", but, as I have already mentioned, off the record (on the phone) you told me that "Acropolis Funerals have done the wrong thing", and "we have the right to take this matter to the NCAT where everyone will be under oath and will have to tell the truth." Fair Trading NSW also told us that this matter should be brought to the attention of the NCAT without bringing it to your attention first. Fair Trading NSW warned us that it would be totally futile and emotionally taxing on us if we brought the matter to your attention first. Fair Trading NSW knew that the Funeral Directors' Association of NSW exists to side with and support member organisations, rather than seek the truth and hold them to account when they do the wrong thing - morally, ethically, professionally, legally - by their clients (bereaved families). We have become very aware that both you and your board have absolutely no conscience or integrity, and, of course, no sympathy for a bereaved family that has been seriously wronged by one of your member organisations. The NCAT can now determine whether or not Acropolis Funerals "have nothing to answer for." Also, my family and I have a good mind to sue you and your board for the serious emotional distress you have inflicted upon us in the appalling way with which you have handled this matter. 

Yours sincerely on behalf of myself and my family.

_____________

This family were put through hell, and by 20 February 2020, I was already a target of the most immoral and diabolical adverse action from yet another RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION. It was against the law to violate not only my privacy, but my family’s! What we were going through, as a family, because of horrendous experiences like this one, regarding unconscionable conduct forcing upon us compounded trauma, is private, personal and NOT THE BUSINESS OF MY EMPLOYER. A UNIVERSITY WITH A MISSION LIKE NO OTHER, INCLUDING A COMMITMENT TO THE DIGNITY OF THE HUMAN PERSON AND COMMON GOOD. The offences committed by senior executive staff were “like no other”, beyond the initial serious complaint of bullying, discrimination and harassment.

My employer benefited greatly from my work ethic and value to the community since August 2001 (that’s not a typo - AUGUST 2001!). I was NOT SLAVE LABOUR. Where’s the Fair and Dignified Work Conditions in this institution towards its staff, students, families and the greater community? 

Fair and Dignified Work Conditions 

Catholic Social Teaching on Work

I expect cooperation for another legally binding agreement, the injury management plan, to be implemented and my legal workers compensation benefits never passed on, starting with the claim form and my entitled payments STILL UNPROCESSED SINCE MID-2020, TO HAPPEN ASAP. IT’S FRAUD. 

NSW State Insurance Regulatory Authority under the NSW Department of Customer Service (you call this prolonged torture and abuse, customer service?). Why are you forcing taxpayers to resort to begging for their legal workplace entitlements being deliberately withheld by a self-insured employer? Another religious privilege, perhaps? 

I PAY TAXES NSW GOVERNMENT. CATHOLIC CHURCH INSURANCE DON’T. They are a registered non-profit with the ACNC. 

The now former CEO of SIRA NSW thought he could cherry pick which key stakeholders could go ahead and commit the crime of fraud as per Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), Part 4AA, and which stakeholders would face the full force of the law. 

What do you think was finally going to happen, Mr. Adam Dent? How the hell did you get the job of CEO?

And all I requested was a safe work environment! All that is coming up, but the reader can review the initial complaint and collective staff and student reviews in my earlier posts of my story. My complaint was never even read by incompetent associate directors, HR (who like to label themselves as “talent acquisition” these days, it fuels narcissism to take out “human” from what was known as “Human Resources”), WHS staff, a self-insurer, all directed by a senior executive group that must be held accountable before someone’s life is placed at serious risk. Give us an update SafeWork NSW and SIRA NSW. 

Surely it’s evident to the reader, even from what I have written so far, it is institutional abuse. It’s institutional betrayal, yes, but with so many lives impacted, and their families, it’s institutional abuse. We all know the fish rots from the head. It’s been proven once more in yet another institution. And this experience with the Greek Orthodox Church community, and its institutions, is exactly the same regarding moral injury, institutional betrayal and abuse. There is nothing Christ-like in any of this behaviour.