Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pre Need Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tennessee board imposes $5,900 penalty after 59 pre‑need contracts were written by unregistered agents
Summary
The Tennessee Board of Funeral Directors amended a council recommendation and approved a $5,900 civil penalty for an establishment after inspectors found 59 pre-need contracts written by three associates without required pre-need sales-agent registrations; board members discussed the statutory penalty ceiling and consumer risk before voting unanimously to accept the amended consent order.
The Tennessee Board of Funeral Directors on April 14 approved a $5,900 civil penalty against a funeral establishment after finding that three associates wrote a combined 59 pre-need contracts without the required pre-need sales-agent registrations.
Legal counsel summarized the case as stemming from a routine inspection on Jan. 13, 2026, which found that one associate had written 48 contracts, a second 10 and a third one contract without proper registration. "In totality, respondent permitted 59 contracts to be written by individuals without proper pre-sales agent registration," counsel told the board and recommended a civil penalty via consent order.
Board members pressed on the scale of the lapse and on possible consumer harm. Counsel noted the statutory ceiling of up to $1,000 per day per violation, observing that the theoretical maximum for 59 violations would be $59,000, while the initial council recommendation landed at $2,500. "Your ceiling is $59,000," counsel said during the discussion. "Your floor is… you could do $250 if you break it down right now."
After debate, board member Chris Lee moved to amend the civil penalty to $5,900; the motion was seconded, called to a vote and adopted unanimously. The board recorded acceptance of the consent order and left open formal hearing authority should circumstances require it.
Board members framed the decision as balancing consumer protection, the number of affected pre-need contracts and the respondent’s disciplinary history. Counsel also said respondents reported they assisted the three associates in renewing their registrations after notice and that the associates stopped meeting with families until properly registered.
The board did not detail further remedial terms beyond the consent order in the public discussion, though counsel noted consent orders can include reinspection or monitoring terms if the board wishes.
The board handled the penalty amendment as part of a larger disciplinary docket that day; the meeting proceeded to consider other complaints and rule and legislative updates before adjourning.
