A bereaved Nottinghamshire mum says she may move her son out of Beeston Cemetery after being left with “no trust” in the council over further memorial rule delays.
The changes to controversial rules seeking to restrict grave memorial items across Broxtowe cemeteries have been delayed for the second time in six months following a deferral by Broxtowe Borough Council’s cabinet on Tuesday (16 December) over one uncompleted document.
Disputes over whether grave owners should be allowed memorial items and gardens on graves have been ongoing since October 2024, when impacted families started a petition opposing tribute restrictions.
A set of “common-sense” rules, as part of collaborative work between the council and bereaved families – allowing items within reason – were originally set to be decided in June 2025 but were deferred to allow more time for discussion between the authority and families.
The dispute was set to be finally resolved in Tuesday’s meeting, with proposed rules allowing tributes and gardens within one metre of the headstone plinth for new graves and for any re-opened older graves. However, this was deferred to the cabinet meeting on 3 February 2026 due to the authority not completing an Equality Impact Assessment (EQIA) – a tool used to avoid discrimination against people with protected characteristics.
Now, Lindsey Collins, whose son Josh Collins died in 2021 at the age of 19 and is buried in Beeston Cemetery, says she has “no trust” in the council and is considering exhuming her son and having him cremated due to the “constant battle” she has faced with the authority over grave issues.
Lindsey says her problems with the council started a few years ago when the authority originally refused Josh’s headstone over size concerns. This was eventually resolved, but she found herself in the separate, current battle to keep Josh’s memorial garden on his grave.
She said: “I just feel really wounded in the respect I’ve had no time to process the death of my son, and I’ve been in a constant battle with the council.
“I do feel dreadful – I’m getting flashbacks now. Nobody ever expects to bury their child, and I feel like I’ve not been provided with that peace to sit and come to terms with the fact that I’ve lost my son – it’ll be five years next March.
“I’m lost with what I’m going to do with my son; I don’t feel at rest leaving him there. It’s becoming more apparent that [exhuming him] is my only alternative – the only way I’m going to have any peace and mourn him correctly is to have him at home.”
After Tuesday’s deferral, impacted families said they felt the EQIA not being completed by relevant council officials in time for the meeting was “deliberate” in an attempt to further delay a resolution on cemetery rules.
In a statement the families said the deferral means they will have to “endure several more weeks of stress and anxiety” over a second Christmas with the rules unresolved.
They said: “We are devastated that we have been let down once again due to the failings of council staff.
“We thank the local councillors who have supported us throughout this process so far, and those who have conducted themselves in an empathetic and professional manner… It is clear that someone has simply not delivered what they were supposed to.
“We are publicly requesting that those responsible for any current and past failings in this particular case are held accountable. We have been patient and co-operative, and the recurring failings and interruptions now feel and appear to be personal.”
Councillor Milan Radulovic said the missing EQIA was “negligent” of council staff.
He said: “It needs to be recognised that council officers are paid employees to deliver, on behalf of elected representatives, the policy of the people, and I don’t think that’s been achieved – I feel very, very upset and aggrieved for [families].
“It was I who set down these deadlines, and I feel badly let down by officers and the advice that’s been given. I think we’ve got this badly wrong, and I think the people have been let down.
“I can only apologise on behalf of the authority for the failure to complete this – what I thought was a relatively straightforward decision and implementation.”
Responding to the families’ concerns that the delay is “deliberate”, as well as Cllr Radulovic’s comments, a spokesperson for the council said: “EQIAs are an important part of our democratic process, and the council is deeply sorry for the omission.
“It is regrettable that this was not picked up much sooner during our report checks and balances. An EQIA will be produced as soon as possible.
“The council has a team of highly dedicated and professional officers who act with the interests of residents and council employees in mind. We are keen to see a resolution to this matter as soon as possible.”
The ongoing cemeteries issue started back in October 2024 in response to the council’s maintenance teams being set to start removing and disposing of tributes from council-run cemeteries in January 2025.
Documents confirm rules have been in place since at least 2009, and prohibited items such as fencing, bedding plants, vases, windmills, glass, and alcohol were noted in cemetery rules in 2019 and 2023. However, impacted families previously said the authority only updated its ‘Notice of Interment’ forms in 2023 to state prohibited items, leading to confusion over the rules.
In October 2024, Cllr Radulovic called a 12-month suspension on the rules following the controversy, setting up a working group with impacted families to find a “common-sense” approach.
This is where new collaborative rules – including hazardous items being removed from all graves, older graves remaining similar, and newer graves being allowed items within 2.5 feet of the headstone plinth – were set to be decided in June 2025 but were deferred for the first time.
The council’s original reasoning for the removal of tribute items was due to maintenance difficulties, health and safety concerns, and because the rules already existed but had not always been enforced.
Emma Georgiou, Assistant Director of Environmental Services at the council, said in a separate council meeting on Monday (15 December) that the proposed one-metre rule goes against officers’ professional advice and brings an “enhanced risk” for cemetery visitors, employees, and the council.
She said “further consideration” was needed to address issues such as accessibility, preventing employee and visitor harm from tribute items, and ensuring legal compliance, and called for a cross-party working group with councillors and officers to look at the implications, which was approved.
