Reverse Mortgages
continued from pg. 17
but high amounts of home equity.
These loans can enable some people to
continue living in their homes, which
may not have been feasible without this
additional source of cash. However, this
loan product is not for everyone, and
potential borrowers should carefully
assess the pros and cons before taking on
a reverse mortgage.
The report Reverse Mortgages: Niche
Product or Mainstream Solution?
published by the AARP Public Policy
Institute in late 2007 presents informa-
tion about consumers who obtained
reverse mortgages, as well as those who
opted not to pursue them after complet-
ing the required pre-loan counseling.
8
Survey respondents cited many reasons
for deciding not to pursue a reverse mort-
gage. The following represent the three
most-cited reasons: the high cost (63
percent); respondents found another way
to meet financial needs (56 percent); or
respondents determined that the loan
was not necessary given the individual’s
financial position (54 percent).
9
The results of this study highlight key
consumer considerations, such as the
importance of pre-loan counseling, which
may provide information about other
programs better suited to a borrower’s
needs. For example, local lenders and
community organizations may offer
low-cost home improvement loans for
seniors. In some cases, consumers might
find they are better off financially if they
sell their property rather than refinance
an existing loan with a reverse mortgage.
Lenders also face risks associated with
the various consumer issues, including
those identified in the AARP survey.
For example, there is a potential for
reputation risk, and perhaps even legal
risks that could result from aggressive
cross-marketing of other financial prod-
ucts, such as long-term annuities. Some
financial service providers encourage
reverse mortgage borrowers to draw
funds to purchase an annuity or other
financial product. Interest begins to
accrue immediately on any funds drawn
from the reverse mortgage, and borrow-
ers may lose other valuable benefits, such
as Medicaid. For example, funds that are
drawn and placed in deposit accounts
or non-deposit investments would be
included in the calculation of the individ-
ual’s liquid assets for purposes of Medic-
aid eligibility.
Aggressive cross-selling is considered
predatory by many consumer advocates.
In fact, the HERA specifically prohibits
lenders from conditioning the extension
of a HECM loan on a requirement that
borrowers purchase insurance, annuities,
or other products, except those that are
usual and customary in mortgage lend-
ing, such as hazard or flood insurance.
These prohibitions apply to HECMs but
not to products in a proprietary lend-
ing program—a fact consumers should
consider when choosing a reverse mort-
gage product.
Another potentially predatory practice
is equity-sharing requirements, which
are contractual obligations for borrow-
ers to share a portion of any gain—or,
in some cases, equity—when the loan
is repaid. These provisions mean addi-
tional, sometimes substantial, charges
that the consumer or the consumer’s
estate is obligated to pay, thus reducing
the consumer’s share of his or her home
value. Such provisions are prohibited in
the HECM program but were a compo-
nent of early reverse mortgage programs
developed in the 1990s. A person who
chooses a proprietary program should
carefully review contracts for the exis-
tence of these provisions.
8
Redfoot, Scholen, and Brown, 2007.
9
Percentages total to more than 100 percent because survey respondents could select more than one reason for
not pursuing a reverse mortgage.
Supervisory Insights Winter 2008
18