A HEARTBROKEN Sheffield family paid hundreds of pounds for a memorial for their late mum - only to discover the base was an old gravestone.
Sisters Carol Walters and Sue Kelly were horrified when, after eight years of problems, they had their mum Lilian's memorial removed from City Road Cemetery - revealing an inscription for a stranger on the underside.
The marble base had once been a gravestone to 'Gertrude' with the words, 'dearly loved wife of Albert Birkinshaw died Sep 2 1952 aged 41 years'.
Devastated Carol, aged 44, of Parson Cross, Sheffield, said it felt as if they had never laid their mum to rest.
She added: "We have both been heartbroken, every time we've visited mum's grave we've been laying flowers at someone else's gravestone. We would never have known if we hadn't switched stonemasons. We couldn't keep it from our dad Edwin and he's gutted.
"This firm shouldn't be allowed to do it, little did we know we were paying all that money for a secondhand stone, it's pure upset. How many more are there?"
The family paid K's Memorials, of City Road, £665 for a marble memorial in the shape of an open book when 71-year-old Lilian Walters died in 1997.
But within 18 months the lettering had been damaged by rain.
K's Memorials installed a new memorial but the sisters rejected it because it was not identical to the original and the lettering was in capitals.
Twice more over the next eight years the firm installed a new stone book but the work failed to satisfy the family and the sisters eventually went to another company.
An identical marble book was ordered from Italy and when the new stonemason lifted the old base the writing was revealed.
Sue, 54, of Worsbrough, Barnsley, said: "It's not that we were picky, we just wanted what we paid for."
The sisters took the firm to the small claims court to get a full refund but K's sent a cheque before the hearing.
Craig Elliott, manager of K's Memorials, insisted using second-hand gravestones had been industry-wide common practice for years.
Gravestones were removed when families wanted to update or replace them, and it was common to reuse them as bases. But since the row the firm had banned them.
He added: "Under no circumstances am I saying what is done is correct, but in my defence it's common practice. I'm throwing out two or three skips of old gravestones a month and it makes sense to reuse and recycle them.
"Legally we've done nothing wrong and my solicitor told me we were fools to settle before the court hearing. But I did it to stop the upset."
The firm had paid out a total of £1,159 in refunds, costs and compensation.
READ MOREMain news indexReaders' Letters
The full article contains 478 words and appears in Sheffield Star newspaper.