CHILTERNS CREMATORIUM JOINT COMMITTEE

 

 

 

MEETING 24TH JUNE 2009

 

 

 

OPEN REPORT OF THE CLERK TO

 

THE JOINT COMMITTEE AND THE SUPERINTENDENT

 

 

 

Background Papers (if any) are specified at the end of each item

 

 

 

1

LIAISON MEETING WITH PERSONS TAKING SERVICES AND        FUNERAL DIRECTORS

 

 

 

     Contact Officer:  Charles Howlett (01494) 724263

 

 

 

1.1     Liaison meetings have been held on an annual basis for many years and are considered to be a constructive public relations exercise, giving users of the Crematorium the opportunity to raise matters for discussion directly with members of the Joint Committee.  The meetings are normally held in April or May.

 

 

 

1.2     A liaison meeting was held on Thursday 23rd April 2009 and the notes of that meeting are included as Appendix 1 – (To Follow)

 

 

 

1.3     A number of matters were discussed, several of which will be followed up by the Superintendent.  Members are asked to consider the notes (Appendix 1) and any matters arising from them.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

 

 

That the next Liaison Meeting be held at 6.45 p.m. at the Crematorium in April or May 2010 (the date to be decided at the meeting) preceded by refreshments.

 

 

 

Background papers: None

 

 

 

 

 

2

SERVICE PLAN 2009 - 2010

 

 

 

     Contact Officer:  Charles Howlett (01494) 724263

 

 

 

2.1     The service plan for the Crematorium has been updated for 2009 - 2010 and the executive summary is included as Appendix 2.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

 

 

That the Crematorium Service Plan for 2009 – 2010 be approved

 

 

 

Background papers: None

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3

MILTON FUNERAL CHAPEL: COMPLETION OF BUILDING WORKS

 

 

 

     Contact Officer: Alan Goodrum (01494) 732001

 

 

 

3.1     Further to the report to the Joint Committee at its meeting on 18th September 2008 (Minute 7 refers), over the winter period 2008/09 all but one of the remaining outstanding defects were completed by the contractor, Thomas Vale (previously Collier and Catley).  The remaining defect is the grouting coming out from between the ceramic floor tiles in the chapel and the architects are concerned that this may be indicative of a more serious defect relating to the sub-structure of the floor.  A resolution is currently being explored with the contractor and whilst it remains unresolved the contract cannot be finally ‘signed off’.

 

 

 

3.2     Work is also currently underway to correct the most significant defect which is the mould growth on the timber (birch plywood) covering the underside of the walkways.  Members will recall that in May 2008 a letter was received from the architects stating that “in order to maintain the goodwill between us we will specify the remedial work and organize the procurement so as to avoid as far as possible any costs falling on the Joint Committee”.  These works, which are being carried out by a company engaged by the architects called Woodbar Limited, involve removing as much of the mould as possible with a fungicidal wash followed by an application of anti-fungal solution, before overlaying the soffits using tongued and grooved treated timber rather than plywood.  The timber then has two coats of varnish applied, and the overall finished appearance is very satisfactory.

 

 

 

3.3     The opportunity is also being taken to include a number of outstanding items of work in the same contract.  These are items which arose as the work on the second funeral chapel project progressed and would normally have been added to the Collier and Catley contract.  However, in the event they were not included because of the increasing problems and deteriorating relationship which was occurring with the contractor at the time.

 

 

 

3.4     This project has a long history of problems which have been outlined in various reports to the Joint Committee since work started on site in December 2003.  However, with the work now well underway to correct the mould problem and complete the outstanding items of work, and remedial works to the chapel flooring being discussed with Thomas Vale, the end of the project is within sight.  When the works are completed a further report will be brought to the Joint Committee which will include the financial outturn of the project.

 

 

 

3.9     This item is included for information.

 

 

 

Background Papers: None

 

 

 

 

 

4

COMPLAINTS AND COMPLIMENTS 2008

 

 

 

Contact Officer:  Charles Howlett (01494) 724263

 

 

 

4.1     Service provision questionnaires are sent to the applicant for cremation for all cremations carried out.  The majority of compliments, comments and complaints received come from this source.  In 2008 from the 3,000 questionnaires sent out 210 were returned from people who were satisfied (some with added compliments) and 26 from people who were mostly satisfied but including comments about matters they thought could be improved.  A brief summary of the responses to the questionnaires are given in Appendix 3.  During the year 9 complaints were also received.

 

 

 

Changes proposed/made as result of comments

 

 

 

4.2     Provision has been made in the 2009/10 budgets to provide facilities to record services and also to make it possible for services to be viewed over the internet (by password access only) as they are taking place.

 

 

 

4.3     The Joint Committee agreed to the creation of approximately a dozen additional car parking spaces in the Milton chapel car park, subject to planning permission being obtained.

 

 

 

4.4     Seating in the form of wooden garden benches has been provided in both floral tribute areas.

 

 

 

4.5     There has been a problem of people finding the right chapel since the second chapel opened in 2005; this appears to be a common problem at crematoria with two or more chapels.  Additional signs were erected during the year in an effort to help people find the chapel they are looking for more easily.

 

 

 

Actions taken in response to complaints

 

 

 

4.6     The following complaints were received:-

 

 

 

Complaint 1:    Staff carried on removing flowers from the chapel of remembrance and did not stop when a visitor came in (on the anniversary of her husband’s death) to look at the entry in the book of remembrance.

 

Response:         There are always a large number of flowers brought in over the Christmas period which have to be removed in early January and this was when the incident occurred.  On a weekly basis the dead flowers are normally removed early in the morning before any visitors arrive, but after occasions such as Christmas, Mothers day and Easter there are so many flowers to dispose of that the removal operation takes longer.  The staff involved were shown the letter and reminded that they should have stopped work and withdrawn from the chapel until the lady had left.   An apology was made by letter.

 

 

 

Complaint 2:     Dead rose bushes in a commemorative rose bed.

 

Response:     Coincidentally the dead bushes had been replaced just a few days before the letter of complaint was received.  A letter advising that new roses had been planted was sent to the complainant.

 

 

 

Complaint 3:     A complaint was received about the cost of renewing the right to have a memorial in the garden of remembrance for a further period.

 

Response:     A letter was sent explaining the reasons why a periodic renewal fee is levied (to help pay for the upkeep and maintenance of the chapel and garden of remembrance and to help ensure there is space for more recently bereaved families to have a memorial), that the renewal policy had been in place since the Crematorium opened in 1966, and that it is a system operated by nearly all the crematoria in the UK.  It was also explained that an alternative lease period of 3 years (for a correspondingly lower fee) was recently introduced to help those who found it difficult to pay the higher fee for 5 years.

 

 

 

Complaint 4:     A mourner wrote in to say the sound systems in both chapels appeared to not be working properly as she and several of her friends were having difficulty hearing the minister clearly when attending funerals.

 

Response:     A letter was sent explaining that in fact there is no sound system in the Hampden chapel (there is a loop system and a music system, but no public address amplification).  The letter also explained that we have been having problems with the ‘new’ system in the Milton which was continuing to receive attention.

 

 

 

Complaint 5:     A person telephoned to complain about the way she was spoken to by the attendant on duty when she visited the Crematorium on a Sunday afternoon.

 

Response:     On making inquiries it became apparent that she arrived after 4.50 p.m. (the Crematorium closes at 5.00 p.m. on a Sunday) and the attendant, who was locking up the building, advised her that he would soon be locking the gates as well and so asked her if she would park he car outside the gates (there is 24/7 pedestrian access to the garden of remembrance).  When she refused an argument ensued which ended when the attendant walked away which the complainant considered rude.

 

The attendant said that he walked away because he felt it was the best way to diffuse the rising level of tension, which the Superintendent accepted.  A discussion took place with the attendant about ways of dealing with a similar difficult situation should it arise again and the matter was also raised at the next staff team meeting.  A letter of explanation was sent to the complainant and an apology for the upset that the incident had inadvertently caused.

 

 

 

Complaint 6:     Mourners were unable to hear a service because the Milton chapel was full and over a hundred mourners had to stand outside.

 

Response:     The number of people attending funerals is continuing to increase but there is a limit as to how many can be physically accommodated, and even the larger Milton chapel is, on occasions, proving insufficient.  External speakers linked to the public address system under the covered entrance and/or in the floral tribute court would enable people standing outside to hear the service, but unfortunately not just those attending the service but also mourners from the previous service or arriving for the next service.  This could equally give rise to complaints.  A letter was sent explaining the situation and apologising that people were unable to hear the proceedings.

 

 

 

Complaint 7:     People with hearing impairment could not hear a tribute in the Hampden chapel because the moveable lectern was used which doesn’t have a microphone.

 

Response:     The lectern in question was given as a memorial many years ago and is free standing which means that it cannot be cabled up for a microphone.  The solution is to use the minister’s lectern which does have a microphone; this happens automatically in the Milton chapel because, deliberately, there is no free standing lectern.  The matter was discussed at a team meeting but no decision was reached as to how to overcome the problem short of removing the memorial lectern form the chapel.  A letter of explanation and apology was sent to the complainant.

 

 

 

Complaint 8:     Dissatisfaction was expressed with the way a commemorative entry had been set out in the book of remembrance; initially it had not had another entry immediately above it or below it and having seen it like this for a number of years the complainant was disappointed on finding that subsequently the spaces had been filled in.

 

Response:     The layout of entries on the pages in the Book is left entirely to the calligraphers, who have the necessary knowledge and expertise of their craft to ensure that the appearance of individual entries is satisfactory, and also the appearance of the whole page once it is completed.  Entries with emblems are set out with two line entries between them.  This is necessary to avoid the emblems themselves clashing with each other (it is not possible to have an emblem with a two line entry).  When there are more entries to be made on a page with emblems than without, then gaps are left for two line entries which are used at a later date.  The matter was investigated and it was found that the entry in question was not set out in any way differently from others.  A letter of explanation was sent.

 

 

 

Complaint 9:     An electrical power-cut prevented special music chosen by a family for a funeral from being played, and during the same service two grounds maintenance staff allegedly walked past the chapel window with ‘tools over their shoulders’.

 

Response:     Frustratingly the diesel generator, which is only three years old and regularly serviced, failed to start.  An engineer was called and no reason could be found; it has started on every occasion before and since!  The grounds maintenance staff were reminded not to walk past the chapel windows when services are in progress and a letter of apology was sent to the family

 

 

 

4.6     This item is included for information.

 

 

 

Background Papers: None

 

 

 

 

 

5

DEER DAMAGE TO THE COMMEMORATIVE ROSES

 

 

 

Contact Officer:  Charles Howlett 01494 724263

 

 

 

5.1     Further to the report to the Joint Committee at its meeting on 9th January 2009 (Minute 22 refers) a new stock fence has been erected, completed at the end of May, at a cost of £18,100 (the budget provision was £20,000).

 

 

 

5.2     As previously reported, one reason for the new fence is to try to deter Muntjac deer from entering the grounds and eating the commemorative roses.  Assuming it is successful in achieving this, then a large number of roses will need to be replaced this autumn, and because of the additional damage which has been inflicted since the 9th January and before the new fence was erected the cost of this work will be higher than anticipated.  The new roses will need to be ordered before the next meeting when the budgets are considered (normally December/January) and so permission is being sought at this stage for the additional expenditure, estimated to be in the region of £2,000.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

 

 

That the maintenance of grounds budget be increased by an additional £2,000, from £13,500 to £15,500, to take into account additional expenditure which will be incurred replacing the commemorative roses which have been destroyed by deer.

 

 

 

Background Papers: None