Cremation Niche Dispute Escalates
This is a news story, published by vancouversun, that relates primarily to Surrey news.
Surrey news
For more Surrey news, you can click here:
more Surrey newsNews about SCOTUS
For more SCOTUS news, you can click here:
more SCOTUS newsvancouversun news
For more news from vancouversun, you can click here:
more news from vancouversunAbout the Otherweb
Otherweb, Inc is a public benefit corporation, dedicated to improving the quality of news people consume. We are non-partisan, junk-free, and ad-free. We use artificial intelligence (AI) to remove junk from your news feed, and allow you to select the best politics news, business news, entertainment news, and much more. If you like this article about SCOTUS, you might also like this article about
Valley View cemetery. We are dedicated to bringing you the highest-quality news, junk-free and ad-free, about your favorite topics. Please come every day to read the latest Golden View Garden news, lawn niche news, news about SCOTUS, and other high-quality news about any topic that interests you. We are working hard to create the best news aggregator on the web, and to put you in control of your news feed - whether you choose to read the latest news through our website, our news app, or our daily newsletter - all free!
Valley View Memorial Gardensvancouversun
•US Politics
US Politics
Cremated remains interred in wrong Surrey cemetery niche, owner seeks removal

63% Informative
B.C. Supreme Court has been asked to resolve a dispute over a niche containing cremated remains in Surrey cemetery.
Mei Chiu in 2013 purchased the interment rights to the lawn niche from Arbor Memorial .
In 2017 , Wing Chuen Chan bought a similar spot, also in Golden View Garden , and after Chan died in 2022 , he was “incorrectly interred” in Chiu ’s niche.
The cemetery said the mistake happened when staff members used an incorrect map to locate the niche.
VR Score
71
Informative language
73
Neutral language
79
Article tone
semi-formal
Language
English
Language complexity
62
Offensive language
not offensive
Hate speech
not hateful
Attention-grabbing headline
not detected
Known propaganda techniques
not detected
Time-value
short-lived
External references
no external sources
Source diversity
no sources