Part 3 ACCC - Letter to Australian Competition & Consumer Commission

The letter to the ACCC dated 5 August 2020, continued (final part):

RE: Advice on a complaint against a funeral business in breach of contract and multiple unsuccessful attempts made toward a fair resolution

Seeking advice from the ACCC

What can the ACCC advise or do regarding our case? How does our family heal and get closure? We were robbed of closure from a business we paid to respectfully and compassionately follow our instructions.

Given this industry is a priority in 2020, I reflected on what needs to be improved:

• Ensure contracts have clauses that state that the service provider must abide exactly to the instructions of the recipient.

• Greater accountability and legal consequences if funeral companies display unconscionable misconduct and misleading / deceptive practices.

Contracts

On the Fair Trading NSW website, it states that a contract has an element of acceptance when the seller agrees to supply a service via an action, such as a signed written agreement accepting the terms and conditions. My family and I were aware that a contract is a legally binding document, which is why we were in shock to ultimately learn that we were deceived by the business in a way that protected them based on the law. The action taken by the business constitutes misleading and deceptive misconduct. A dash in an item line and the representative intentionally not signing the agreement at a vulnerable and distressing time for my family has caused us great inconvenience (see above) and great disadvantage because this was enforced in a very manipulative and calculated way. Would not the dash, then, be a term that gives the business a way to avoid the liability for a breach of contract? Did we, a grieving and vulnerable family, know that a dash was anything different to a recording of a zero dollar amount written instead - $0? Is this not a false impression regarding the service agreed to be offered? Isn’t this against the law?

We suffered loss and damage as a result of the business conduct – loss of closure, respect and our right to at least have the business we paid to conduct the service, follow our wishes and instructions. The additional trauma, injury and distress this has caused over the years, in attempting to hold the business accountable, and for respectful and a fair resolution to give us the closure we need is indescribable. How does one place a value on this?

It was, indeed, a misleading condition – a dash in the contract – without having agreed or having been informed that it means the business can add anything above what is written and agreed to in the contract, without charging the family. We were not informed and had not agreed to this. It did cause damage, especially the attitude that they did us a favour. On the Fair Trading NSW webpage about misleading representations and deceptive conduct (https://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/buying-products-and-services/advertising-and-pricing/misleading-or-deceptive-conduct), it is highlighted that “a business can break the law if it fails to disclose relevant facts to you. Silence can be misleading or deceptive when:

• One person fails to alert another to facts known only to them, and the facts are relevant to the decision [eg. our suspicion that Fr. John had pre-informed his brother, the then funeral director, Kon Grillis, regarding the relation to a priest and the possibility of a demand by him. The business could oblige to the priest’s request while also protecting themselves from legal action. This meant that Acropolis Funerals could continue good “business” relations with this priest and his parish].

• Important details a person should know are not conveyed to them [eg. the meaning of the dash and the request that was made by someone not the next of kin. We were not contacted, had no knowledge of the arrangement, had not given permission or authorised such action, but were presented with it the morning of the funeral when our only focus was on the hearse carrying our father and husband after a sudden and shocking and tragic death].

• A change in circumstance meant information already provided was incorrect”.

The silence was both misleading and deceptive in the most unethical and immoral way.

Reviewing the Fair Trading Regulation 2019 Division 2 – Funeral goods and services, my family and I were at a serious legal disadvantage regarding the funeral information in the contract. A dash in an item does not mean anything to a vulnerable family who specifically stated verbally, only one car for three people in the funeral cortege. Therefore, it is very evident that information was withheld from us, putting us at a disadvantage in any future attempt to seek accountability. The website of Acropolis Funerals states that… “We will organise the collection of your loved one from the place of passing, into our care and will further prepare all of the required paperwork needed for legal purposes” (https://www.acropolisfunerals.com.au/our-funeral-services/ ). There is no information stating that if a dash is placed in an item on the legal document, it means anything in that section can be added and no cost will be charged. We did not agree or request anything else to be added. The cost was not the issue. It was unethical and unprofessional to add a car in the funeral cortege for seven strangers without our consent, authority and knowledge, then avoid responding as to why this occurred, and displaying serious misconduct including stating they were doing my family a favour. This was not a favour but a serious violation of their legal obligation to us and, at best, disrespectful and unprofessional.

They are in serious breach of their code of ethics as displayed on their website:

https://www.acropolisfunerals.com.au/code-of-ethics/

Clause 9 in the Fair Trading Regulation 2019 (NSW) Section 8 states that “a funeral director must provide ... a) the price of each of the particular goods and services that will be supplied to the person under the agreement.” (https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_reg/ftr2019208/s8.html). Where does it state, in the regulation, anything about a dash? What about the funeral representative withholding their own signature on the agreement? We noticed this later and questioned this as a family, before learning about the dash in an item line.

As for unconscionable conduct, I will leave the ACCC to decide to what extent all this has been more than just unfair or unreasonable. I have listed a number of points that have come to our attention gradually over the years that exposes how this business knowingly exploited the special disadvantage of a vulnerable, traumatised, pained, shocked and grieving family.

Now there is a new funeral goods and services information standard that commenced on 1 February 2020, that funeral directors must legally comply with. However, where does that leave families like ours who were deceived and put through hell by a funeral business before the revised information standard as part of the Fair Trading Regulation 2019? Had there been a standard regarding an itemised quote before entering into a contract or agreement with the funeral director, we would not have experienced this deceptive and unprofessional misconduct. If we had, it would have been held to account immediately. They withheld information, there was no transparency, but displayed an extremely unprofessional and disgraceful attitude, given the knowledge they had that we did not until earlier this year. Also, what is the role of the Funeral Directors Association?

The death of a loved one is, indeed, very painful and overwhelming, especially a sudden and shocking death like suicide. Regarding a quote of advice on the Fair Trading NSW webpage about Funerals, that consumers do their research and ask family and friends for recommendations to find the funeral director right for our needs, that is not always possible, based on the circumstances and traumatic shock a family may be going through. Under different circumstances, my family would never have even considered Acropolis Funerals. Thanks to a priest, we ended up with the usual business they would call at such times in the Greek Orthodox community.

This webpage also states that “remember, although the funeral director ‘directs’ the funeral, you make the final decisions”. I was confident that was a legal requirement. Then why did the funeral director make a decision without informing us and obtaining our permission to proceed or decline another person’s request who is NOT the next of kin? The funeral director misled / deceived us.

In the records attached with this letter for guidance and advice from the ACCC, please find the written copy of the contract we signed (but deliberately not signed by the now funeral director). We did use this and referred to it during the years we have tried to have a dispute resolution. If we are entitled to an appropriate remedy from the business given the service we agreed to did not meet a number of consumer guarantees, then why did this not happen in the many avenues we tried to enforce our consumer rights and entitlements? What does the ACCC advise would be a reasonable reimbursement for damages and consequential loss?

Given what my family has been put through, especially the unprofessional conduct of the funeral directors and employees, we offer suggestions to finally bring this case to a close with a reasonable and fair resolution. This must occur for the closure we need to heal and move on with our lives.*

1. A letter of apology with the reasons why Acropolis Funerals made such decisions against our knowledge and authorisation (initially, this was the only request we made before taking it to Fair Trading NSW);

2. Full refund on the total amount as written in the Funeral Agreement of Costs (given they provided unauthorised services for free to a group of people without our knowledge or authorisation, I think it is now fair to have our costs refunded too. Initially when the matter went to Fair Trading NSW, our request was only for the service cost to be refunded. Given how the business behaved and repeatedly refused any reasonable attempt to resolve this dispute, I think it is fair to now request a refund for the total amount);

3. Paying the invoice of the headstone for our beloved husband and father’s grave, which, to date, has not been organised by us, his family. There has not been any form of closure all this time because of the unconscionable conduct of Acropolis Funerals. This action would truly show some form of respect, to a family the funeral directors of Acropolis Funerals took advantage of, in the vulnerable and fragile nature of our grief, and then continued to be arrogant, unprofessional, disrespectful and rude toward us. After fulfilling points 1 and 2 above, we can bring closure and pay our respects to our beloved husband and father with dignity, by arranging the construction of the headstone. I feel that these three outcomes are the least this business can do to make amends and repair the damage they caused us.

The evidence I have attached are as follows:

• Letters of complaint to Acropolis Funerals dated 14/06/2010 and 21/02/2011

• Documents submitted to Fair Trading NSW in January / February 2015

• Correspondence with the Funeral Directors’ Association of NSW from 2015

• Documents pertaining to the application with the NCAT

• Company information for Acropolis Funerals and Icon Funerals

__________________

* The above requests are no longer available, given the funeral directors (former and current, who were both involved in the deception and unconscionable conduct), have continued to be unconscionable and deceptive. They were also suggestions, as I mentioned. My family, who are reading what I too attempted, need to consider what they require, for years of such emotional distress and unconscionable conduct from directors of Acropolis Funerals, and seek ethical legal representation. Ultimately, the ACCC’s response was to seek legal advice (which the letter explains that we tried and discovered the contractual “anomaly”). 

I do wonder if public servants actually listen to the public they serve. Was this letter read in its entirety? It was, after all, a year that the chair of ACCC made enforcement and compliance on funeral business a priority. Perhaps it was preparing me for things to come, this time with the Fair Work Ombudsman, when she made the university sector a priority for cleaning up wage theft. I guess self-insured employer fraud as the lowest diabolical adverse action, causing massive financial damage, is OK for the office of the Fair Work Ombudsman, as it was for NSW State Insurance Regulatory Authority, SafeWork NSW and NSW Police, for years. There may be parliamentary debate to criminalise wage theft, but fraud is already a crime. This case is currently being investigated by an individual in the office of the NSW Ombudsman and, from Service NSW, escalated to the ministerial office of Minister Dib’s portfolio of the NSW Department of Customer Service. I was left all alone, for years, forced to play political strategic war games. To expose, at best, systemic failure and broken communication. At worst, there is a volume of evidence I compiled that, put together, reveals suspicions of a more “sinister agenda”, with some of these “players”. 

Therefore, I hope my family make use of this information regarding Acropolis Funerals, because I was concurrently being subjected to another case of power abuse and unconscionable conduct, where I was forced by three workplace regulators, to “manage” on my own. I was denied my human right to a voice. That included my volume of evidence. Records of truth. They are public servants, we are the public stakeholders. They are accountable to us. 

This is still only the beginning of my story. 

FAIR TRADING REGULATION 2019

Part 2 ACCC - Letter to Australian Competition & Consumer Commission

The letter to the ACCC dated 5 August 2020, continued:

RE: Advice on a complaint against a funeral business in breach of contract and multiple unsuccessful attempts made toward a fair resolution

NCAT incidence that was the final traumatic experience we (the family) could handle

A few more years lapsed due to family adversities, one of which was caused by this unresolved issue. We are not experts in the law, nor understand legal jargon regarding how long we have to bring such a matter to the NCAT. The procedures and communication by the NCAT were also of a very poor standard, leaving us open to even more trauma and distress.

In the application, finally submitted in February 2020, we wrote the following (all these records have been attached to this enquiry):

We are seeking this order because Acropolis Funerals subjected us, the family, to serious emotional and psychological injury, anguish and distress by:

1. not following our instructions as recorded in the 'Funeral Agreement', as paid for and as expected;

2. making arrangements and decisions with relatives, and simply informing us on the morning of the funeral;

3. providing a funeral car for seven people without our knowledge, authorisation and consent;

4. refusing to admit to any wrongdoing;

5. refusing to apologise for disrespecting and ignoring our wishes as recorded in a legally binding contract;

6. making us feel that they in fact did us a favour by providing these people with a funeral car free of charge (a vehicle we did not want there in the first place);

7. making excuses to justify their actions through the investigations conducted by Fair Trading NSW and the Funeral Directors' Association of NSW;

8. telling us that they had to obey the wishes of a priest above and beyond the wishes of the immediate family;

9. telling us that they provided this priest (and six other people) with the car because they "knew him personally through doing much business for him" and so felt "it would not be a problem providing him and six other people with a car for the funeral cortege";

10. insulting us by telling us they were following Greek Orthodox tradition by providing a priest with a funeral car irrespective of the family's wishes, when in fact what they did had nothing to do with Greek Orthodox tradition, but was simply highly unethical and unprofessional behaviour on their behalf.

28 February 2020

Our payment was processed and a date set for the hearing. However, we had a bad feeling regarding whether we were still within the legal timeframe for this hearing to proceed. I assumed we were, given the payment was processed and a date set. For reassurance and peace of mind, two days before the hearing, we called the NCAT to enquire regarding this timeframe. We were anxious to avoid any more horrendous attitude and humiliation toward us by the funeral directors of this business. The customer service on its own, was appalling. The staff member was discourteous, disinterested, had an attitude that needs to be addressed, advised us to attend and we would be told what needed to be done [on the day]. Thanks to this NCAT staff member, our worst nightmare we wanted to avoid, was realised.

The disgusting attitude and behaviour, like some form of triumph, from the two representatives of this poor excuse of a funeral service, was the last straw, especially how they behaved in front of my mother. It was horrendous, and from what I know, these hearings a voice recorded. The case was withdrawn for the only reason being it was now outside the legal timeframe. We have attempted to seek closure so we can heal for 10 years! This was the final emotional blow we could take. Are we really forced to accept this and live with these open wounds for life? This business had a legal obligation to abide by our wishes. We had entrusted them to do the simple things we agreed on, to ensure we had closure as part of our healing.

When the outcome of the hearing was emailed to me from the NCAT, I responded with a complaint / enquiry (all these records are attached) [to quote]:

“May I ask why the online application went through without any problems and payment processed, considering it was passed the date this matter could be heard? We also tried to clarify the actual law regarding timeframe to resolve a dispute by calling the number regarding questions about NCAT processes. We felt the lady was dismissive of our question and told us to just attend and we would be told there what to do.

This case was against a funeral business that displayed professional misconduct beyond only a breach of contract. Today we experienced further emotional trauma having been subjected to the funeral director’s continuous display of insensitive and disrespectful behaviour. It was something we could have avoided had our enquiry been professionally and properly addressed when we called on Wednesday.

Having to be subjected to more trauma and being further stripped of our dignity as a family and paying for it too, both financially and emotionally, was something we could have avoided if proper guidance was given when we called and asked on Wednesday.

I’m assuming this email showing that the case was dismissed / terminated has also gone to the funeral business. The whole “system” of NCAT, where no one was willing to explain how this works, succeeded in a new open bleeding wound with the funeral director walking out of the courtroom gloating and smirking at us.

We are about to put them on notice via a consumer lawyer, but today dealt us another blow of trauma and emotional distress we didn’t need.

The communication in this whole process has been appalling.”

An automated email reply alerted me that I would receive a response within 5 working days. I never received a response.

Legal advice from a law firm on consumer law 

We were in such distress and shock regarding this incident, we immediately walked a few blocks to a legal firm in Sutherland after the hearing at Sutherland Local Court. It was when seeking legal advice that we were informed about the dash in the extra car item line. We were already suspicious why the current funeral director (she was a representative back then, her family has since bought the business) had not signed the agreement, but we had no idea regarding the dash. Based on the law, this “dash” protected them. We had indeed, specifically stated that we only wanted one car for three people. How is it fair for us, at that time, that we had to insist that it was put in writing in the contract? We informed the representative no extra car, just the one sedan for the immediate family. Were we to know a dash was going to protect this unethical business and, furthermore, give these funeral directors a confident attitude to smirk, be rude and disrespectful toward us? How is that displaying compassion and quality service? Where is the accountability for unconscionable conduct in our case?

This is what we suspect happened that gave this unethical business an extremely unfair advantage (insider information is as corrupt as insider trading in my opinion). Kon Grillis’ brother is the priest at St. Athanasius Greek Orthodox Chapel at Rookwood Cemetery. Fr. John most likely pre-informed the then funeral director, his brother, Kon Grillis, that we were related to the priest at Liverpool and there was a history of “issues” between us. Our family was highly regarded in this community, given my brother studied Theology under the late Archbishop. All the priests in the community knew us due to my brother’s studies and association and they also knew we were estranged from a certain priest for serious personal reasons.

If this is the case, and knowing how these people operate, especially in this community, many abusing their position of “authority” as clergy, everything that happened to us was extremely underhanded. That we could possibly be betrayed even before the representative of Acropolis Funerals came to our home to prepare the service is unconscionable conduct. In order to make sure the business was protected from any possible legal action taken later in case this fellow priest demanded his own arrangements for the funeral too, Fr. John most likely informed his brother to seek legal advice to cover themselves.

We now understood why they had such an arrogant attitude. Their argument was that they did everything we agreed, as written in the contract. But after speaking to a consumer lawyer, it was all in the dash placed in the extra car section. That apparently meant that anything above and on top of what we had agreed in the contract was extra and would not be charged to the family. We NEVER agreed to this or were informed. This unethical business took advantage of our vulnerability and also disadvantaged us by withholding information / not being transparent in their communication as well as having private information that they also used to their advantage.

We paid for our car which was the only one agreed in the contract. I’ve heard horror stories regarding this industry and how unethical they can be. On the day of the funeral, my family and I all had our eyes fixated on the hearse that carried my father. Only later when we could gather our thoughts did we think about the betrayal and deceit by Acropolis Funerals.

Part 3 is a continuation of the letter, covering consumer rights regarding contracts that I discovered on the NSW Fair Trading website in 2020. 

For now I also provide a link to the Australian Consumer Law - Competition and Consumer Act 2010 Schedule (Cth). 

https://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewtoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/caca2010265/toc-sch2.html. 

I particularly draw attention from S.18 of the Act, onwards, of clauses breached by Acropolis Funerals.  

I hope that my family, who will be reading this post, re-read the fine print, and consider seeking advice from someone in the legal profession who is socially just, ethical and who will actually look after the interests of clients taken advantage of, in their most vulnerable time, by an unscrupulous funeral business. At the very least, it’s important people know our experience, and what happened to us. 

 

 A partial snapshot of the contract

Part 1 ACCC - Letter to Australian Competition & Consumer Commission

In 2020, the Funeral Industry was a compliance and enforcement priority for the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission, (see https://www.accc.gov.au/about-us/news/speeches/accc-2020-compliance-and-enforcement-priorities-speech). This is why I sent a letter, hoping to have a voice regarding the “unconscionable conduct” the Chair of the ACCC, Mr. Rod Sims, mentioned in his speech on 25 February 2020 (see above link). My family’s issue of breach of contract, unethical and unconscionable conduct by a funeral business, was timely. The horrific display of hostility and passive aggressive behaviour at the NCAT, by the director of Acropolis Funerals and an equally unprofessional employee, left my family scarred. That display of inhumane behaviour is imprinted in my memory. 

The letter I wrote to the ACCC goes through everything we attempted for a fair resolution. All the while, a bureaucratic “system”, a “process”, kept compounding our trauma, grinding us down, while a bunch of unethical and unconscionable people running funeral businesses, preying on vulnerable consumers, have yet to be held accountable. 

Remember, this issue was happening concurrently with the diabolical adverse action, including the crime of self-insured employer fraud and a publicly funded university violating my family’s privacy, to then send menacing emails in attempt to intimidate them into silence for making a formal complaint of the fact. 

These concurrent incidents of unconscionable conduct, that include indictable offences, were happening, when I wrote the letter to the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission.

Since then, the ACCC has published a report in December 2021 Funeral services sector : Competition and consumer issues and Consumer vulnerability : A business guide to the Australian Consumer Law and a webpage regarding Funeral Services at https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/specific-products-and-activities/funeral-services

The letter is dated 5 August 2020. 

RE: Advice on a complaint against a funeral business in breach of contract and multiple unsuccessful attempts made toward a fair resolution

Dear ACCC,

I am seeking advice and guidance from this authority regarding multiple attempts I and my family have made to reasonably resolve a complaint against a funeral business, for being in breach of contract. In this letter and with the attached records regarding this case, I will explain what happened and what we have tried in order to resolve the dispute.

Mr Rod Sims, Chair of the ACCC, was accurate when he stated, in a speech on compliance and enforcement priorities, on 25 February 2020, that there are “complaints from consumers about misleading and deceptive practices in the [funeral] sector. These include hidden fees, add-on services not included and misrepresentations about what will be covered. Additionally, there are allegations of unfair contract terms...

Most concerning are allegations of unconscionable conduct. There are allegations that some funeral operators ... take advantage of consumers at a vulnerable time.” Indeed, he was also right that “many consumers engage with the funeral sector at a time when they are grieving, vulnerable and thereby at a disadvantage”. (https://www.accc.gov.au/speech/accc-2020-compliance-and-enforcement-priorities)

This is what my family and I experienced. On 02/02/2010 we lost our husband and father to a tragic death by suicide. Given the shock and trauma of that evening, we asked the priest we had contacted to just call a funeral business to get it done. We were not in a good state and thought we would ask for some assistance. Being of Greek Orthodox background, the main business on a priest’s contact list is Acropolis Funerals. I assure you, had we been in a frame of mind to research and prepare the funeral with a business of our choice, we would not have used this business to begin with. Then the following happened:

Acropolis Funerals
Incidences of serious and unconscionable conduct regarding the funeral of my father

a). We asked a priest to just call a funeral service to get it done. He called Acropolis Funeral Services to begin arrangements for the funeral;

b). One request was that we wanted ONLY ONE vehicle, a sedan for three people, for  funeral cortege (this is recorded in the 'Funeral Agreement of Costs');

c). On the morning of the funeral, 09/02/2010, the funeral director announced to us that the night before a relative called him (a priest) and demanded a car for seven people to be included in the funeral procession. The car was given to these people WITHOUT our knowledge, consent, permission and authorisation;

d). In other words, a decision was made between Acropolis Funerals and a string of relatives WITHOUT our approval or knowledge. This was disgusting and unacceptable;

e). On the morning of the funeral our focus was on our husband and father and our grief, not on unacceptable surprises the funeral director decided to spring on us at that difficult time;

Letters of complaint were unsuccessful

f). About four months later, we contacted Acropolis Funerals in writing and asked for a written explanation concerning this matter. A written explanation was never sent to us;

g). One night, the funeral director (at the time Kon Grillis, now a funeral director at Icon Funerals - https://iconfunerals.com.au/) called to tell us that 1) the car was demanded of him; 2) the relative demanding the car was a priest and he felt that he had to obey the wishes of a priest over and above the wishes of the immediate family (our father's brother-in-law is a Greek Orthodox priest); and 3) he (the funeral director) thought that we would just accept this without question. Also, to add insult to injury, he told us that he respected our family by giving the relatives the funeral car free of charge;

h). This is professional misconduct, a serious breach of contract, and is unjust to force us to "just accept";

i). Acropolis Funerals added to the heavy burden of a family already burdened with grief;

j). A second letter was sent on 21 February 2011, repeating our dissatisfaction and the need to now refer it to another authority for a resolution.

Complaint submitted to Fair Trading NSW was unsuccessful

k). We forwarded the matter to Fair Trading NSW. This occurred in February 2015. (Please appreciate the private trauma and grief this family needed to try and process in a structured way. The pain added by this business that ultimately lacked such compassion in even respecting our need to resolve this grievance for closure). Fair Trading NSW investigated, and advised us to escalate the matter by bringing it to the attention of the NCAT, because mediation from Fair Trading NSW did not work. The Fair Trading NSW reference number for this case is 7405028;

Complaint to the FDA NSW was unsuccessful

l). Around the same time in 2015, we also brought the matter to the attention of the Funeral Directors' Association of NSW. They “investigated”, sided with the business, and "on the record", accepted the excuses Acropolis Funerals gave for their actions, and proceeded (in writing) to disrespect and insult us in a way that left us in further shock. However, "off the record" (in a phone conversation) they told us that Acropolis Funerals did, in fact, do the wrong thing by us, and strongly advised us to bring the matter to the attention of the NCAT, where "everyone would be under oath, and everyone would have to tell the truth".

Part 2 is a continuation of the letter, covering the attempt with NCAT and in seeking legal advice on consumer law and breach of contract. 

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. 

NSW Funeral Directors Association - Questionable business ethics

In January and February of 2015, my family submitted a complaint against Acropolis Funerals to the NSW Department of Fair Trading. Like the experience I was soon to have with the Independent Review Office, these government agencies don’t have powers to take action. The only thing of benefit, ultimately, is a case number and records of the case in the archives. 

What is missing from any public service “process” is the human factor. In this case, the staff were professional and understanding. But when it has to do with industries and businesses, like funerals, where clients are taken advantage of at their most vulnerable time (even worse when it’s disenfranchised grief from a suicide in the family), another bureaucratic step in this “process” with no positive outcome, exacerbates the trauma that such unethical businesses, and their serious misconduct, cause. Instead of closure and healing, there is compounded trauma. 

The response from NSW Fair Trading, with options for “next steps” in this “process”, was sent on 13 February 2015. 

Immediately after, on 15 February 2015, my family tried another approach in seeking a fair resolution from the uncooperative and unethical Acropolis Funerals. They called the NSW Funeral Directors Association, followed up with an email and attached documents of what my poor family have tried so far.  

Before I share the written response, after a questionable internal “investigation” by the board of the NSW FDA, I visited their website, specifically their Code of Ethics. 

I think it’s important to share the ten points in the Code of Ethics, before sharing the NSW FDA’s questionable response, and my family’s response, addressing each of these ignorant, arrogant, deceitful, patronising and dismissive points in the formal letter from the NSW FDA addressed to my family. How dare they, and more so, how dare Acropolis Funerals, insult our intelligence, and now treat us as though we don’t know our own Greek Orthodox traditions and culture. How more audacious, immoral (and stupid) can they get. 

Code of Ethics
Members of the FDA of NSW subscribe to the following code:

1. To maintain in all matters the highest standards of business, professional and personal conduct.
2. To respect in all circumstances the confidentiality and trust of clients.
3. To ensure that staff is qualified and competent.
4. To ensure that facilities are adequate for all services rendered.
5. To provide information concerning the range of services available, the prices of the services and the functions and responsibilities accepted.
6. To give a written estimate of all funeral charges and disbursements to be made on a client's behalf at the time of taking instructions or as soon as practicable.
7. To respect personal choice and have regard for diversity of beliefs in religious and cultural practices.
8. To ensure that all advertising is genuinely informative and in good taste.
9. To be thoroughly conversant with the laws of the land as they apply to funeral service and allied industries and professions.
10. To provide an advisory service with conciliation and arbitration arrangements available to help resolve disputes which may arise between members and their clients.

Now let’s review the response to my family, from the secretary of the board of the NSW Funeral Directors Association, after an “internal investigation” (?) into our contractual dispute, deception and unethical conduct of Acropolis Funerals. As mentioned in previous posts, all correspondence and attempts at resolving this issue have been scanned and kept by me and my family. 

Letter sent on 8 April 2015

NSW THE FUNERAL DIRECTORS' ASSOCIATION OF NSW LTD

Subject: Complaint on Acropolis Funerals 

Dear [Family], 

I acknowledge receipt of your email dated Sunday February 15, 2015, regarding a complaint on Acropolis Funerals on the services rendered for the funeral of your late father. In line with our policy, we have received the details in writing of your experience with Acropolis Funerals and in turn have visited the company of Acropolis Funerals to hear their side of the story. 

The board has come to a decision based on a few pertinent issues: 

• that in line with Greek custom a request from a Greek priest to attend a funeral is common practice and is considered an honour to have a priest in attendance and in those instances they do provide a car if requested to transport the priest to the funeral, so in this instance Acropolis have not acted outside the ordinary being unaware of any estrangement in the family. (They were very aware, even if just by what happened at the viewing the day before the funeral. What utter crap regarding priestly “privileges”. And his entire family too?).

• it was noted that on 12.2.10 you sent a cheque accompanied by a note to Vicky Kiriazis, quote "Thankyou for everything! Regards", which, to the board appeared that at the time you were satisfied with the service provided. (NOTE: this seems to be a common tactic used in complaint letters, that causes more anger, trauma and is disgusting to throw any small example of polite human behaviour, especially in a surreal and vulnerable situation people find themselves in, back in their face. It is severely offensive and disrespectful. We were in automatic response mode, thanking everyone, still numb with shock. Such arrogance and collective indifference and narcissism, giving themselves a pat on the back. Congratulating themselves for robbing us of healing and closure). 

• it was then on June 14, 2010 you sent a letter to Acropolis re issuing a funeral vehicle without your consent, at which time I was told that Acropolis rang and spoke to you regarding your complaint but at the end of the conversation all appeared to have been sorted out to both parties acknowledgement. 

• The board is of the impression that the family is of Greek descent and that this custom would in all reasonableness have been known by the family. 

• Acropolis claim that a letter from you that we had, dated February 21, 2011 was never received by them. We have given them a copy. (Not good enough. Hence let the entire world read my and my family’s traumatic experience, letters and all, on my personal blog now. It’s my story of moral injury, betrayal, and unethical business conduct in my life. It’s my voice, where I was repeatedly denied a right to speak). 

• As far as Acropolis being a member of this association is concerned, it would appear 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 other than over the phone soon after the letter dated June 14 2010, was received. While the death of a loved family member is a traumatic experience even in the best of times, any abnormality that occurs outside the expected can blow out of all proportions and while the board sympathize with you, feel that in this instance, Acropolis Funerals rendered the service to your father with the greatest respect and dignity that is deserved and as such have nothing to answer for. 

Yours sincerely, on behalf of the board, executive officer Cc: Acropolis Funerals.

Suite 4G, "Redmyre House", 9 - 13 Redmyre Road Strathfield NSW Postal: PO Box 270, Strathfield NSW 2135 Telephone: 1800 613913 Facsimile: (02) 8078 3825 Email: secretary@fdansw.com.au ABN: 46 978 571 730 Website: www.fdansw.com.au

NOW SCROLL BACK UP AND RE-READ THE NSW FUNERAL DIRECTORS ASSOCIATION CODE OF ETHICS. 

DOES THE READER FEEL THAT THE NSW FDA BOARD, IN ADDITION TO ACROPOLIS FUNERALS, ADHERE TO THEIR OWN CODE OF ETHICS? 

OR HAS THE PUBLIC, ONCE AGAIN, BEEN FED MORE BULLSHIT?! 

Family’s response in the next post. I’m re-traumatised sharing all this, but it finally has to be done, for my family’s sake. And for other people, other families, who relate to such unethical business conduct. 

Family’s second letter of complaint to Acropolis Funerals

“If hatred is a disease, it is mutating. As our culture cures itself of one strain, new ones take its place.”

Jamil Zaki in 

The war for kindness: Building empathy in a fractured world. (2019). London: Robinson.

The follow up letter was sent on 21 February 2011, just over a year after my father’s funeral, and just over eight months since the first letter. All correspondence and attempts at resolving this issue have been scanned and kept by me and my family. 

Given this letter, allegedly never received by Acropolis Funerals, is now shared on my blog, there is no excuse that they haven’t “received” it. This is my blog, I have a right to share a legitimate review about my experience of funeral directors in the funeral business that behaved unethically. My family carry the scars of what the staff at this funeral business did. There is no deadline, like a legal statute of limitations, in trying to heal from these wounds. Because Acropolis Funerals and its directors, both former and current, refused to cooperate to resolve this issue when we tried within the first year. The unconscionable conduct from the FDA, then frustrating attempts with the toothless Department of Fair Trading, resulted in greater trauma and greater lapse of time. This lead to failure at the NCAT, other than experiencing the most horrendous attitude from the current funeral director and another heartless employee. 

Given the greater indifference and narcissism that was to come, I must write my lived experiences of indifference and narcissism that have festered. Australia has become very sick as a society. To quote Troy Stolz, a brave man who challenged Chris Minns as an Independent, for the seat of Kogarah at the last NSW state election, we have a legal system, not a justice system. He knows this all too well in his ethical and passionate battle for greater regulatory and systemic reform, accountability and laws regarding the gambling industry. Concurrently, this social justice warrior is also being treated for cancer. Now this man is a true blue Aussie battler, for society, for his mates, who were also persecuted for being ethical, for a justice system.

This was the follow-up letter of complaint sent to Acropolis Funerals:

To whom it may concern, 

A number of months ago we sent you a letter of complaint concerning the fact that you issued a funeral vehicle to a group of people for our father’s funeral without our authorisation and consent.

Overall, you handled the funeral fairly well and with sensitivity.* However, you displayed unacceptable professional misconduct in issuing a funeral vehicle to anyone - in this case estranged relatives - without our prior consent. In other words, you simply disregarded us (your clients) and gave [the priest] and his family the vehicle because, to use your own words, he had told you he had “organised it” with us, and then, to use your own words again, he “demanded” the vehicle from you. 

We kindly requested that you send us a written explanation why you issued the aforementioned person with the vehicle, especially going against our wishes as your clients. For some strange reason you have refused to forward this letter to us. Had you sent us the letter we requested we would have had no further problem with your business. We would have simply taken up the matter with [the priest]. In refusing to send us a written explanation for your action, you have only made your position worse. 

As a funeral business you should know better than to go against the wishes of a bereaved family when they entrust funeral arrangements to you. A bereaved family has more than enough to deal with, without having to worry about the funeral business making its own choices and its own decisions. 

We regret to inform you that we have no other choice but to forward this matter to a solicitor who will advise us accordingly. 

Sincerely,

The [family].

____________

* We were yet to learn about the dash in the line item for “extra vehicle” on the agreement, and what would likely be “claimed” by Acropolis had we taken legal action. I can’t speak for my family, but for me, I retract the sentence about how Acropolis Funerals “handled” the funeral. 

The unprofessional way the staff conducted themselves toward my family, without any attempt to seek a reasonable and fair resolution about their own decision regarding my father’s funeral, it was not only an act of betrayal and disrespecting our wishes, it robbed us of closure. Once again sunlight is the best disinfectant. 

I will not be robbed of my voice and my right to share my own traumatic experience of this funeral business and the unethical conduct of its funeral directors, both former and current. The former, Kon, has started another funeral business, Icon Funerals. The current funeral director of Acropolis Funerals was then an employee, who came into our family home, prepared and ready to betray us, to use a mark, the dash, on the written agreement, while withholding information to disadvantage us, a vulnerable family at the time, and benefit and protect Acropolis Funerals in their unethical practices. I suspect they already had insider information from Kon’s brother, also a priest, the chaplain at the chapel at Rookwood, not far from where my father is now buried. This is clericalism. This is the clergy club. This is abuse of power. 

I’m sickened by the unconscionable conduct and horrendous attitude. From all of them. It’s something I will never forget. 

Family’s first letter of complaint to Acropolis Funerals

The letter was sent on 14 June 2010, several months after my father’s funeral. All correspondence and attempts at resolving this issue have been scanned and kept by me and my family. 

This was the first letter of complaint sent to Acropolis Funerals:

To whom it may concern, 

We, the family of the late C.B., are writing to complain about the issuing of a funeral car for our father’s funeral procession, without our authorisation and consent as your clients.

When arranging the funeral, which was held on 9th February 2010, we requested one car for three people, the immediate family of the deceased. To our shock and dismay, on the day of the funeral, we were told by the funeral director that certain people, estranged relatives, contacted the business to arrange their own vehicle to follow the procession. This was arranged without our knowledge or approval and was only revealed to us on the day of the funeral, in which case it was too late for us to actually do anything about it. 

With what authority did this funeral business arrange and issue another vehicle without direct permission from the clients? In addition to the pain and grief of losing a father and husband, we had to endure the pain and anger of having a group of people in the funeral procession that we have absolutely nothing to do with. How could your business inflict such pain upon us? These audacious “so called” relations had no right to request a funeral car directly from you in the first place. However, it was unprofessional on your part to issue the vehicle without consulting with us and obtaining our consent. 

We, the family, would like to know the reason Acropolis Funerals made the decision to go ahead and give those people the funeral vehicle without our consent. Be aware that on top of our grief these last few months, this incident on the day of the funeral has caused us greater emotional pain. This situation is totally unacceptable and was more than we could bear. 

We would like to find a solution to this problem. We expect a written response as to why this vehicle was issued without our knowledge, within ten working days of receipt of this letter. If we are not satisfied with the response or reason, we have no choice but to take this matter to a higher authority. 

Sincerely, 

The [family].

_______________

We never received a written response. We did receive a call from the then funeral director, Kon Grillis. Refer to my previous post regarding excuses and more salt rubbed on our wounds as he tried to get out of his responsibility and deflect the problem onto us: eg. “but we respected your family and gave them the car for free” (would he be so bold as to charge us? But he didn’t charge the offending party either, most likely “because he’s a priest”, to use his words, verbatim. Again, refer to the previous post). 

We are consumers and we have a right to share our experiences. The bigger issue, for me, was the dodging of the complaint and refusing to cooperate for a fair and reasonable solution to the problem. It by no means ends here. A second letter was sent (next post), betrayal and closing ranks from the Funeral Directors Association, another government toothless tiger in the Department of Fair Trading, the trauma at the NCAT, and my letter to the ACCC, after my own research regarding consumer rights, specifically in relation to funeral businesses. 

Let the buyer beware. 

To be continued, with the second letter, which was allegedly never received by Acropolis Funerals. Perhaps now Australia Post is to blame. Our mistake for not sending the letter express or registered post, with an allocated tracking number. That was our lesson learned.