Incentivised Funeral Savings Scheme pilot: qualitative research - full report

Results

Funeral savings

Knowledge of costs

Almost all participants had a view on the cost of a funeral in Scotland and knowledge of costs was typically based on personal experience. This included having arranged the funeral of a close family member, helping a family member purchase a funeral plan or from assisting with the arrangements of a funeral for a friend or family member.

Participants typically assessed funeral costs to be around £3,000 to £4,000, with some placing the costs substantially above this (upwards of £6,000) once cars, flowers and other costs had been taken into account. Some thought costs could be less, especially if a burial plot had already been purchased, and if the service and refreshments were basic and provided locally. Cost expectations varied a little between age, location and NRS social grade.

Those in remote rural areas, in some cases, appeared to have additional costs. Typically, participants in rural areas would opt for burial and noted that the cost of plots was high, and had been rising significantly over recent years. In one case, for example, a participant had bought a plot for around £400 in 2007, but when used, in 2017, after a family bereavement, plots cost around £1,200. Cremation was a limited option, with crematoriums often considerable distances away, which could increase mortuary costs and require long journeys for the funeral party. Participants also noted the limited ‘choice’ of funeral directors in rural areas, potentially impacting on price, although none had complaints about the quality of service they had personally received.

Typically, older people, and those who were recently bereaved, felt that a ‘decent funeral’ was important. Descriptions of a ‘decent funeral’ varied, from a burial with a few friends, refreshments at a local community centre, or a full funeral reception to accommodate friends visiting from further afield. The estimated price of decent funeral varied accordingly, ranging from £2,000-£3,000 to around £6,000-£8,000.

Many participants were angry at the cost of funerals in Scotland. Participants, especially younger people, and some of those with lower incomes, felt that funerals should cost less. They considered the price of funerals to be rising ahead of general inflation and that societal pressure, as with weddings, was sometimes exerted on those arranging funerals to include unnecessary components, such as flowers, cards or cars, which increased costs.

“When I buried my father 20 years ago, the bill was £1,600-£1,700, and I had to cough that up. My mum died ten years ago, in 2011, and the cost then came to just over £3,500.” (Urban C2DE Male 60+)

Several participants referenced minimalist approaches, for example, cremations, or cardboard coffins, which could minimise costs. Indeed, participants often indicated that they would be content for a basic, or minimalist, approach to their own funeral, and would prefer the money saved to be spent on more enjoyable or useful things.

“The old fashioned way was you wanted the best coffin and all the rest of it. But now, a lot of people are quite eco-friendly, and ‘it doesn’t matter, I’m just going in the ground, you know’.” (Rural C2DE Female 40-60)

Related to this, was a concern that £4,000 - £6,000 was a sizable amount of money to expect people to have saved throughout their retirement, especially as emergencies might occur, or investments or pensions could reduce in value.

Participants also highlighted that funerals were not something people typically “shopped around for”. Indeed, families may feel under societal pressure to select expensive options (or not select the inexpensive options) to give their relative the “send-off they deserve”. It was stressed that relatives are rarely in a position to browse different funeral directors or funeral services in order to save money. The quotes below are lengthy, but illustrate this point starkly.

“The way I look at it, when my missus passed away during the night I got up and thought ‘What do I do’? Panic stations. The police ended up coming because she died in the house. The boy said, ‘Do you want us to get the undertaker’? I thought ‘What are you going to do, leave her lying there? She will have to go somewhere’. I wasn’t going to phone up X Funeral Directors and say ‘How much is it going to cost?’ If it was three and a half grand I wouldn’t phone up y Funeral Directors and ask how much they were. If they were too dear I wouldn’t phone up Z… You have a body lying there of someone you have loved all your life. How can I explain? All you want is them to be put to rest and all the best done for them [The cost] is the last thing on your mind.” (Rural C2DE Male 40-60)

“I had a friend – I won’t say who. His wife was in a care home. He went to X Funeral Directors and priced everything. He wanted his wife cremated. And he saw what X Funeral Directors were charging, so he went to the crematorium and got a price from. Then he says, ‘I want my wife to lie in the house, not in here, so you can take that out of the equation’. And he got the price knocked down - phenomenal!” (Rural C2DE Female 60+)

Notably, while participants generally felt they had a fairly good understanding of what a funeral costs now, many mentioned having been surprised at the cost the first time they had arranged a funeral. In particular, participants mentioned there had been items they had to pay for that had been unexpected (for example, mortuary time), and that the cost of some individual items had been a surprise.

“I was absolutely devastated five years ago when I saw the cost of my husband’s funeral. Total rip off. But at the time you’re so distressed and you go with your arrangements, and then you get the bill and you think, how could that have come [about]? ”(Urban C2DE Female 60+)

Extent of funeral savings

Very few participants had made specific provision for the cost of their funeral, although some knew they had sufficient assets. On reflection many others realised they did have savings or insurance policies which could cover the cost, although there was concern that these might decline in value over time.

Those who had indicated they had higher disposable incomes - typically, but not always, those in NRS social group C2 or in work – were most likely to indicate they were confident the savings they had in place would cover the cost of a funeral. Most had life insurance policies and other smaller policies that they had acquired over the years and expected to pay out moderate sums in the future.

Those on moderate incomes and with a degree of disposable income – typically older people and people in NRS social groups C2 – often initially thought they had insufficient savings for their funeral. However, as the discussion progressed, many remembered they had small life insurance policies or savings accounts that, accumatively, would be sufficient to meet the cost of a basic funeral.

Those on lower incomes - typically those on state benefits, pensioners with low incomes and those in precarious work - generally had very little disposable income, had not made specific provision for their funeral, and did not have substantial savings or assets that their family would be able to use to pay the costs. They often spoke of saving small amounts of money either at home (in envelopes or jars) or through local savings clubs (such as stamps with local shops, credit unions or menages). These participants thought of such savings as being essential to manage expenditures such as Christmas or birthdays or for paying their insurance policies. However, they frequently found themselves “dipping in” to such funds, if accessible, to pay for living costs.

Most participants had given thought to their own funeral and the costs associated. Often the main reason for funeral planning was the death of a close relative. Indeed, many participants had developed their plans with other family members also been affected by a death. They indicated that the prime motivator for making provisions was to ensure their family did not have to worry about funeral costs at a stressful time.

“I have to think about it because what I don’t want is my family to be saddled with the debt, because they’re a young family, they’ve got young kids, and the last thing I want is them to say, “how are we going to find the money…?”(Urban DE Male 60+)

There were clear differences by age and location. Older participants (those aged 60 and over) were, perhaps unsurprisingly, most likely to have started to actively plan for their funeral, while younger participants (those aged between 40-60) were often prompted into action after assisting a parent purchase a funeral plan or making arrangements for a parent’s funeral.

“On funeral plans, it’s just something that’s a bit close to the heart at the moment because we’ve got parents in palliative care. My mum and dad have paid for the funeral, all done and dusted. We used to joke about that, but now that my other in-laws haven’t, it makes you stop and think.” (Urban DE Female 60+)

One key aspect of funeral planning in rural areas – rarely mentioned by participants in urban areas – was to have purchased a burial plot. A number of participants living in rural areas had already done so, or had been gifted their plot by a parent or sibling. The primary driver had been to enable families to remain together in the cemetery. However, as the price of plots rose, many considered plots bought previously as a “sound investment”.

“I lost my brother fifteen years ago, and to placate my father, I bought my plot...so I’m halfway there. That’s the only land I own!” (Rural C2DE Female 40-60)

Motivations for saving

Participants were motivated to save by a number of factors:

Ease of saving: Almost all participants indicated they find it easiest to save when funds come straight from their salary or income at source (by standing order, direct debit or by their partner organising it). Participants found it much harder to actively put money aside and were nearly unanimous that the best way to ensure they saved for something was when they had no access to the savings. Those who use credit unions mentioned they particularly liked having savings deducted directly from their income sources, while others mentioned giving money to friends or partners to ensure it was not spent.

Short-term goals: Participants tended to have short-term saving goals such as for events like Christmas, family birthdays, decorating their home, holidays and, in some cases, maintaining or replacing their car. Longer-term goals (such as insurance policies or motgages) were rarely accommodated through personal savings.

Sufficient funds: A key factor in being motivated to save was having enough disposable income to do so. Those most likely to have savings, pensions and life insurance policies were those on higher incomes.

Personal experience: A key motivator for putting funeral plans in place, (such as purchasing a funeral plot), was personal experience. Linked to this was an intent that those responsible for their funeral would not experience any financial or emotional burdens associated with arrnanging it.

Those on lower incomes were often motivated to save using savings plans, especially in contexts where savings could be built gradually, where the product was trustworthy, and where there were clear benefits to the savings plan.

Barriers to saving

Many participants identified a number of barriers to achieving their savings ambitions. Indeed, for many, saving was seen as an aspiration rather than a reality. Those who did put money aside on a weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly basis often ended up “tapping into” that money out of necessity.

Participants identified a number of barriers to funeral saving:

Insufficient income: Many participants lacked the resources and/or the security of income to commit to saving towards a funeral. These tended to be those with lower incomes, often in urban areas, and sometimes in younger age groups. Some participants simply had no spare income, so saving for anything beyond emergencies was unthinkable. Some had limited amounts of money that could be saved, but this tended to be used for items such as Christmas, birthdays, household goods and decoration, insurance and, less commonly, a holiday or car.

Some of these participants voiced fears about how their funeral would be funded, asking for reassurance that there were benefits to help cover the costs. Participants across all groups believed that everyone has the right to a funeral and most agreed the SG should guarantee a funeral for those without the funds available.

“I think if you don’t have a property and you don’t have any money, the government should pay for your funeral. Not for a ‘pauper’s funeral’, just a basic, nice funeral.” (Rural C2DE Female 40-60)

Lack of trust in the funeral plans available: This is covered this in more depth below. However, in summary, participants mentioned being unable to afford to pay for many private plans upfront, being unclear as to the total cost of plans, having a lack of clarity around what the plan includes (and linked to that, being concerned that relatives would have to pay for additional items at a later date). There was also concern that plan owners might overpay into the plan.

Other savings in place: Younger participants tended to express confidence that their funeral could be covered through existing insurance policies, general savings and ISAs, or by selling assets. These funds were designed to cover more than funeral costs, but participants were confident that these funds would be sufficient to cover associated expenses. Many older participants also held these assets but some were concerned that their value could or would decline, necessitating a need for additional funds to meet full funeral costs.

Not got round to it yet: One of the main reasons participants did not have funeral savings was that they simply had not yet started and did not currently consider it a priority.

The incentivised funeral savings scheme

The proposition

The core proposition for an incentivised funeral savings scheme is as follows:

• A savings scheme to help people with their funeral costs
• Designed to encourage people to save for their funeral and support them in doing so
• Scottish Government will contribute to the savings that account holders make, up to a specified limit

Participants were overwhelmingly positive when presented with the core proposition for the IFSS. Most participants thought the core proposition was very promising and some likened the government contributions to assistance to first time buyers and tax relief on pensions or mortgages.

“I’d like to have something in place, like if the government was wanting to contribute, at least there’s peace of mind.” (Rural C2DE Female 60+)

There was concern, however, that those most in need of the scheme, may have insufficient income, to be able to save into the scheme.

“There’s people that can’t afford that. There are people going to food banks. These people genuinely couldn’t probably afford even two pound a week. To them, that’s a lot of money” (Urban DE Female 60+)

Key features

The key features are still in an early stage of development. The participants discussed three potential features of the scheme:

• The account holder’s contribution may or may not be accessible
• The government contribution may only be used for the purpose of the account holder’s funeral
• It would be run through Credit Unions

Participants may or may not withdraw their contribution

Participants overwhelmingly agreed that their contributions should be locked into the IFSS, and only used for the purpose of their funeral. Most found it both difficult to save, and necessary to dip back into any savings they had for day-to-day essentials, one-off emergencies, major purchases or the occasional treat. They were clear that, if they could withdraw the money from the IFSS, they would.

“It’s tempting as a wee savings thing, just to say ‘do you know what I’m going to go on holiday’ and just use that money this year. You know what I mean, then you’re back to square one again.” (Urban C2 Female 40-60)

A small number of participants suggested additional conditions:

·Option to withdraw some or all of the money in extreme circumstances, for example, to prevent eviction or bankruptcy or in case of redundancy

·Provision to pay the sums directly to a funeral director if there are concerns that the next of kin may not use the money appropriately

·Where savings exceed the cost of the funeral, savings are returned to the estate

Scottish Government contribution used for the purpose of a funeral

All participants agreed that the government’s contribution should be ring-fenced to pay for funeral costs. Some raised questions as to what would happen to the government’s contribution should the contributor withdraw their savings for any reason, however, most were confident the government would reclaim its share accordingly.

Run through a credit union

Most participants were unfamiliar with credit unions. Some of those in urban areas were members, while others knew of them through friends, family or their housing association. More generally, participants had seen a TV programme about credit unions, so broadly understood their role and function in local communities (but tended to think they only operated in England).

That said, in principle, participants were generally warm to the proposal that credit unions, and in particular, those that could be accessed locally, would run the IFSS (and this is discussed in detail on pages 23-24).

Eligibility criteria

Eligibility criteria included:

• Be aged over 40
• Have no existing financial provision for a funeral (for example a funeral plan or over 50’s life insurance)
• Be resident in Scotland

The majority of participants felt that the scheme must be open to everyone and that resources should not be targeted towards any one group as it would be unfair for some to benefit from a government contribution while others did not.

Participants were asked whether everyone, regardless of their income or wealth status, should be able to access an IFSS. Participants tended to suggest that everybody should have access, but there was an assumption that those with the means to pay for their own funeral would not sign up. The scheme is considering eligibility criteria around age, existing financial provision and residence.

Age

There were mixed views across the groups on the eligible age bracket. It was suggested by many participants that people may not start thinking about saving for their funeral until they are 40 years old (or much older), and it may be difficult to achieve buy-in from those who are younger. However, many people thought that limiting the scheme to people aged over 40 was too late. Allowing people to start saving earlier could give reassurance that savings were started and enable the saving of smaller amounts of money over a longer period of time. It could also provide protection in the case of reduced earnings due to illness or unemployment in later life. Participants in one group also commented that some living in Glasgow’s poorest areas die younger than in other areas of Scotland.

“My younger brother had a good working life for a number of years, but he became an alcoholic and he died. At the end my brother and I had to pay for his funeral. And me and my brother had to pick up the pieces, rather than him have a pauper’s funeral… I just think there must be 100s like that.” (Rural C2DE Male 60+)

Existing financial provision

Most participants disagreed with the proposed idea that the scheme should only be available to people who had no existing financial provision and felt, to be equitable, the scheme should be open to all.

A number of concerns and issues about this aspect of the IFSS were raised:

Definitions: Participants asked for further details on what constituted financial provision for a funeral.

Impact of inflation: There were concerns that savings within the scheme, if not indexed to the cost of funerals, would be insufficient to cover the cost of a funeral. Participants thought it may be helpful to have a number of different products so that they could ensure the cost of their funeral was covered.

Rules on private provision: Some participants asked if they would be allowed to take out private provision after they had started or completed savings in an IFSS (in this case ‘completed’ tended to mean saving around £4,000-6,000). Most thought they should be allowed to, but there was a strong view that it would unfair to allow people to take out private provision after an IFSS, but not before.

Effect of private provision on SG contribution: Several participants asked what would happen if they were to take out private provision after they had started or completed an IFSS. How would the government know? Would they lose the government’s IFSS contribution? Would this act as a disincentive to people making additional private provision?

Residence in Scotland

On the whole, participants were content that the scheme should be restricted to people who are resident in Scotland. A small number of participants questioned how this would be defined (for example, how long someone would need to have been resident in Scotland in order to participate). However, most participants were firmly of the view that requiring people to be living in Scotland while they contributed was perfectly appropriate.

Other issues

Participants raised a number of other issues with respect to the scheme:

Compulsory or voluntary: There were mixed views across focus groups as to whether the IFSS should be voluntary or compulsory. Several participants thought everyone should be required to save a small amount towards their funeral once they started work.

Direct deductions from income source: Many of the participants found it difficult to actively save, and suggested contributions should be deducted directly from earnings, benefits or other income sources.

Payment holidays: Several participants, especially those on low or insecure incomes, were concerned that by joining the IFSS they would have to make regular payments, regardless of personal circumstances. They suggested that to be appealing the scheme would have to be flexible and allow them to suspend their savings for a period if times were difficult.

“I think they should take it off your wages automatically. The reason for that is because it [death] is going to happen to the folk who have nothing to pay in. How are they going to get buried? If everybody had to pay in, there is no excuse for anyone not to have a burial.” (Rural DE Male 60+)

Attitudes to the proposed Scottish Government contribution to the IFSS

Expectations of the governement contribution

On the whole, participants thought that a fairly significant government contribution to the IFSS would incentivise savings and assist those on low incomes to pay for their funeral. Typically, participants assumed the government would match fund participant savings, or “at the very least”,contribute the equivalent of 50% of participant savings. However, some thought the contribution would be much smaller than that, possibly as low as 25% or 10% of participant savings.

“That sounds not bad because if you were paying £20 a week and the Scottish Government had to pay £5 or £10 then that is £30 you are getting in. It only has to take £4,000, so it does not have to take forever. So, once you had enough money you would have your insurance.” (Rural C2DE Male 40-60)

“It seems too good to be true. I couldn’t see them putting in anything much, no way. I couldn’t go to 10%.” (Rural C2 Female 40-60)

Typically, the expectation was that the cap set on the government’s contribution would be in line with the total cost of an average funeral. For example, those who expected match-funding assumed the government would contribute £2,000-3,000 (to fund a funeral of £4,000-6,000) if savers saved £2,000-£3,000 themselves. Those who expected a government contribution capped at 10% of the total cost of an average funeral, assumed the maximum contribution would be £400-600 (10% of £4,000-6,000) if savers saved £400-£600 themselves.

A small number of participants assumed the government would continue to make contributions in line with those of savers and there was some discussion as to how high this could go.

Views on proposed value of contribution to the IFSS

Perhaps not surprisingly therefore, participants were universally underwhelmed by the proposed government contributions. Proposed contributions of £125 and £250 were met with disbelief, laughter and derision in all groups. Participants tended to suggest they would not join a scheme offering these amounts because “what is the point”? Indeed, across all the groups, participants spontaneously listed funeral expenses that would be (barely met) by the government contribution.

The reaction was similar when the proposed contribution of £400 was introduced to the groups. Most participants remained surprised and disappointed with the level of contribution. Even those who had guessed the contribution may be around this level were indifferent. However, all were clear that £400 was not an adequate incentive to save for their funeral and there was no difference across location or social group.

Willingness to join

The discussion prompted all groups to think seriously about funeral planning and making financial provision for their funeral. However, views were mixed about whether they would join an IFSS.

Many were withholding judgement until they found out more. They could be interested in joining if they were able to hold additional savings, life insurance policies and private pensions at the same time. However, if they were limited to this as their only financial product, they would be very unlikely to join. These participants tended to be in higher income groups, be younger and in work, older with private pensions, and have some financial products or savings already.

Some thought the scheme might be of interest, as they had limited savings as yet and were distrustful of private funeral plans.

Some were not interested. They considered the scheme restrictive, the government contribution minimal, and were concerned that by the time they died, their savings would not cover a decent funeral. On reflection they preferred schemes that would guarantee savings to cover the cost of the funeral and enable them to influence the other aspects of their funeral, so that their family were not pressured into spending more money than they needed to.

Some had insufficient funds to contribute to a savings scheme as any disposable income was needed to cover day-to-day living costs or emergency expenses.

An alternative proposition based on an insurance model

Many of the groups suggested an alternative approach would be to increase their National Insurance contributions to fund a basic funeral. It is noted that powers relating to National Insurance contributions are reserved to the UK Government, and could not be adjusted by the Scottish Government under current powers. However, many participants assumed that the tax and welfare system could be used to administer such a scheme, with payments similar to national insurance contributions.

This alternative model was felt to offer many advantages, such as contributions being linked to age and income with the government contributing in certain circumstances (such as during periods of unemployment and maternity leave). However, there were different assumptions as to how this model would work in reality, with some assuming everyone who was a member of the scheme would benefit, regardless of the amount paid in, and others assuming the scheme would protect the value of contributions made.

In summary, the key features of an alternative model were thought to be:

• Entry into the scheme would be compulsory once economically active
• Payments would be taken directly from income source and contributions of those not in work or on low wages could be supplemented through the benefit system
• The contribution required would be very small
• The scheme would cover basic costs such as death certificates, mortuary costs and crematorium or burial fees while any extra costs (such as flowers) would be covered by the individual or their family

“You leave school as a 16-year-old. You might die at 17 years old but if they offer you 20p or 50p a week they should just take that like national insurance. If you are on benefits you get the basic but surely you are getting a national insurance stamp anyway, so why not take 30p or 50p off them as well?” (Rural C2DE Male 40-60)

Delivery partners

Awareness of credit unions

Awareness of credit unions varied by levels of rurality. Participants who lived in large, urban areas like Edinburgh, Glasgow, and to a lesser extent Dundee, were much more likely to be aware and engaged with credit unions than participants living in more rural locations. Participants who were aware of, or who had experience of, credit unions tended to be extremely positive of them.

Credit unions were widely viewed as being trustworthy, especially when compared to traditional financial institutions like banks. Several participants understood credit unions to be community-based, which they viewed as a positive feature.

“I think I would definitely look into it. I do have some credit unions [nearby]. I think my son is in one right now, and I think they’re pretty trustworthy. It’s like the people’s bank.” (Urban C2 Male 40-60)

Most of those who lived in remote or rural locations, like the Scottish Borders or Aberdeenshire, knew little of credit unions apart from, in some cases, generalities and none currently used a credit union. Several participants who had a general understanding of credit unions attributed this to a recent BBC documentary series called A Matter of Life and Debt.

“I’ve seen a programme on TV in the mornings recently, about credit unions. It just seems like a local lending establishment who offer variable, favourable rates to people maybe with bad credit ratings.” (Rural C2 Male 40-60)

“I watched something on the TV about credit unions. If you save into them, people can borrow money, or people who haven’t got money and need it, they go in and ask for a loan, and then they just pay it back at a certain amount, and it’s not high interest.” (Rural C2DE Female 60+)

Despite the limited general awareness of credit unions, participants tended to be positive about the services they provided and the prospect of them partnering with SG to deliver the IFSS. Notably, many of those who did not have prior awareness of credit unions generally assessed them to be acceptable delivery partners once their features were discussed within the groups. Across all groups, those discussions were spontaneously led by other participants who had an awareness of what credit unions do.

Interestingly, one group raised concerns with the word “credit” as this was associated with debt. This negative association would make those participants sceptical and nervous about engaging with credit unions.

“The word credit worries me. It’s the word credit. You see, I have been in the situation years ago where I had to live off credit, and credit is something you’ve got to pay back. And I don’t want to be in that position again unless I really have to, which I don’t.” (Rural DE Female 60+)

There is potential to expand awareness of credit unions, particularly in rural areas, to support savings and low cost borrowing.

Use of credit unions and alternative providers

Credit unions were identified as the preferred provider for the IFSS across all groups. Banks and the Post Office were spontaneously mentioned as potential alternatives but were generally viewed as being less appealing than credit unions.

Many of the concerns with using traditional banks centred around a perceived instability, with a number of participants referencing bank closures in their local area. Rural participants spoke of ‘bank busses’ that now serve their communities as a result of branch closures. There was also a general distrust of banks, with several participants highlighting their reluctance to allow banks to make larger profits from savings for funeral costs.

“So many banks are shutting. They are all online, and I don’t trust anything like that. I wouldn’t trust the banks anymore.” (Urban DE Female 60+)

“We’ve got bank vans now instead of actual banks, which is going back years… one broke down the other day… I seen (sic) it on a pickup lorry getting towed away.” (Rural C2DE Female 40-60)

The Post Office was viewed by many, typically older participants, as a potential alternative delivery partner for the IFSS, and a few used the Post Office for their daily banking. Like credit unions, the Post Office was viewed as more trustworthy than traditional banks. However, concerns were raised about the closure of Post Offices in urban and rural areas and credit unions emerged as the preferred provider.

“If the government go with the Post Office, great. I’ve got one two minutes from here.” (Urban C2 Male 40-60)

“It would be great but… Post Offices have all shut down.” (Urban DE Male 60+)

Access to accounts

Across all groups, the preferred ways to access financial accounts were eirther online or visiting a branch.

Online access tended to be popular amongst younger participants who valued the convenience of having 24-hour access to their accounts. Many older participants also used online services to access their accounts, though a number had reservations about relying solely on internet-based banking and others simply did not have access to the internet to use such services.

“[Online] is convenient…24 hours a day.” (Urban C2DE Male 60+)

“I’d say I mostly [do] stuff online, but occasionally I have to go in…most of the stuff to be done is better online.” (Rural C2DE Female 60+)

“I don’t [use online banking], because I had a bad experience once. Money came out of my account, and I stopped it after that.” (Urban C2 Male 40-60)

Almost all participants, across all ages and socio-economic groups, still visited local branches to deal with complex issues such as opening or closing an account, dealing with queries about an account, or making a complaint. Older participants, perhaps unsurprisingly, were more likely than younger participants to visit branches as the primary way of accessing their accounts.

“I am an ex-bank worker and I would never, never bank online.” (Rural C2DE Female 40-60)

“Me, myself, I’d go into the branch, because I can’t do this online thing.” (Rural C2DE Female 60+)

Despite the majority of participants choosing to access their accounts through online banking or visiting branches in person, there were a couple of participants, typically older, who still use telephone banking on a regular basis. Those who use telephone banking highlighted the convenience, and ability to deal with a customer service advisor, without having to leave their home.

“[Telephone banking] is convenient for me as well, because you can call them when it suits you rather than thinking well I’ve got to make an appointment between nine and five.” (Urban DE Male 60+)

Flexibility was the consistent theme, across all groups, when discussing methods of accessing account. There was a view that the IFSS should not discount any methods of accessing accounts because there were those who still tended to use the more ‘traditional methods’ like telephone banking.

Promotion of the incentivised funeral savings scheme

Awareness of advertising for funeral products

Most participants were familiar with private funeral plans and had witnessed an increase in TV, radio and social media advertisement around funeral products which had increased awareness of the costs of funerals.

“I have to say I’ve noticed a lot more advertising. The companies with the funeral plans, they’re on all the time on the television” (Urban DE Male 60+)

Several participants were able to recall specific features of this type of advertisement, for exmaple, free gifts as incentives for inquiring about, or taking out, a funeral plan.

“It was on the television…The average cost is £3,781.” (Rural C2DE Female 40-60)

“You see all the ads on TV, it’s like ‘call us now you’ve got a free pen’.” (Urban DE Male 60+)

“I think it’s the funeral plans where if you get one before a certain date you get a hundred pounds Marks and Spencer voucher.” (Urban C2 Female 40-60)

Notably, a number of participants, typically those who were older or with higher disposable income, had considered purchasing or had purchased a private funeral plan as a result of advertisement.

Views on such advertising

Advertisements around funeral products were generally viewed positively across all groups and there were a number of participants who had been encouraged to arrange their own funerals as a result of seeing such advertisements.

Despite a general positivity around advertising, participants identified four principal concerns around private funeral plans:

Policy would not pay out for a period of time: Participants were concerned that many private schemes require an extended period of payment before cover is available.

Advertised benefit would not cover the cost of the funeral: There was a general awareness that the cost of funerals in Scotland continues to rise year-on-year. Many participants, especially younger ones, were concerned that the amount paid out would not cover the full cost of their funeral in the future. A couple of participants had experiences of family members having funeral plans that did not cover the full costs of their funerals

Potential to overpay: Participants, typically younger or those with low incomes, raised concerns around overpayment. Some feared paying in more than a private scheme policy would return if they began saving at a young age. This concern was borne out of similar experiences of family members.

Lack of affordability: Participants who had mentioned that they had little disposable income tended to dismiss private funeral plans outright because they simply could not afford the costs associated with these types of products. Many highlighted the common requirement for a one-off payment on purchase as something that would be impossible to afford.

“There’s a lot of people [who] can’t save. They’re going to food banks, so how can they save.” (Urban C2DE Female 40-60)

Preferred communication channels for an incentivised funeral savings scheme

When asked about their preferred communication channels for finding out about a potential IFSS, all groups mentioned leaflets in public spaces, such as community centres, health centres, council buildings, and GP practices. Most participants tended to visit these locations often and viewed the leaflets available as reliable sources of information.

Social media was a focus for younger participants and Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram were all mentioned as appropriate communication channels. However, many older participants held particularly negative views of these platforms and would not be reached through these channels.

TV and radio were viewed as being trustworthy, convenient, and visible across all locations, age groups, and socio-economic groups and would be effective mechanisms of promotion.