Reverse Mortgages, Simplified

By: DIANA GOLOBAY
September 25, 2009 4:11 PM CST

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) issued a consumer advisory warning consumers 62 years of age or older of the drawbacks and dangers associated with taking out a reverse mortgage — and outlining the benefits of these “complex loans.”

The bulletin comes at a time when getting back to “plain vanilla” financial products continues to be a huge topic of discussion, especially among lawmakers conducting hearings over financial regulatory reform. The House Financial Services Committee this week is hearing testimony regarding the Administration’s proposed reforms, including a consumer financial protection agency that may regulate the types of loans banks can sell to consumers. Committee chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) has opposed the “plain vanilla” requirement that lenders would be allowed to market and sell only simple loans.

The “plain vanilla” language was mirrored in comments by American Securitization Forum deputy executive director Tom Deutsch to Forbes, when he compared the mortgage-backed securities (MBS) of the future to vanilla ice cream as opposed to past ‘Baskin-Robbins flavors.’

If reverse mortgages — or home equity conversion mortgages (HECMs) under the Federal Housing Administration’s lending program — were a flavor of ice cream, they might be chocolate.

They certainly would be appealing to qualifying homeowners looking for additional income to supplement their retirement plans or meet health care costs. Reverse mortgages typically bear low interest rates and do not require monthly payments. In fact, they are not due until the borrower ceases using the home — either sells it, moves out or passes away.

But just like that single-scoop of fudge-ripple, double-churned dark chocolate ice cream is likely to go straight to your thighs, reverse mortgages pose some drawbacks. The OCC points out mortgage insurance premiums and other up-front costs tend to make reverse mortgages more expensive over the long-term, and payments received are added to the loan balance over time, which also increases due to interest charged.

Plus, borrowers that neglect to pay property taxes, insurance and reasonable home repairs may find their loans become payable prematurely. Reverse mortgages are typically repaid by surrendering the collateral — the home itself. That works best when the borrower has passed away or moved into a retirement or assisted living facility.

But a reverse mortgage that becomes due when the borrower is not yet ready is a huge risk. If the borrower (or the borrower’s family in the case of the borrower passing away) wishes to keep the home, the mortgage must be repaid in full, plus all accumulated interest and fees.

So when the sugar high of a reverse mortgage wears off and the reality of the expense crashes down, borrowers might wish for a more “plain vanilla” loan. The OCC suggests in its bulletin that consumers consider other options — like standard mortgages and home equity lines of credit — that might not pose as large a risk.


One Response to “Reverse Mortgages, Simplified”

  • October 12th, 2009 5:29 pm by Owen McKeon

    What alternatives do retired seniors have with little or no income, but want to stay in their home? They won’t qualify for forward mortgages or equity lines of credit. The administration and congress has been mean spirited against seniors by imposing a 10% reduction in available cash, across the board, without any thought about who might be a foreclose risk on a reverse mortgage. A senior with no debt getting a RM is less likely to be at risk of foreclosure as a senior with high debt. Why not assign a premium to the greater risk and give more cash to those who the least risk.

    The administration and congress are looking for path of least resistance, - burden seniors with less cash in their retirement and lessen their residual equity, under the guise of preventing another housing debacle. Why not impose fees across the entire mortgage industry to create a fund for such disasters?

    If the FHA would compare all premiums collected on all reverse mortgages and compare it to payments the FHA had to make on foreclosed loans since the program began, and if a loss resulted, it might justify an increase in premium, but if the contra is true, then why hold back cash on all seniors needing a RM for the rest of their stay in the home?

    A comparison should also be made between risk of foreclosure on forward mortgage and reverse mortgages based, the amounts paid out by the FHA against funds created to absorb such risk.

Got something to say?
Remarks by first-time commenters will not appear immediately, and must be approved before they will appear. All comments are subject to HousingWire's usage policy.

Get your HW Fix

Join nearly 10,000 bold subscribers who already get our daily email delivered to their inbox -- it's free, and a great way to ensure you don't miss something.

RESPA Webinar by Wolters Kluwer Financial Services
Advertisement
Distressed Asset Directory Banner

Events

2009 Dec 09 -- 2009 Dec 10

RMBS: Assessing Value and Risk

This two-day course in New York City will equip market participants with the knowledge and skills to evaluate prime, Alt-A and subprime RMBS portfolios in order to assess their value and understand inherent risks. For more information, visit www.fitchratings.com.

2010 Jan 13 -- 2010 Jan 14

2010 Collection Technology Summit

The Collection Technology Summit is the first industry event to focus solely on collections and its associated technologies and continues to draw top executives from the nation's most prominent institutions. The Collection Technology Summit, where innovation happens. For more information, visit www.collectiontechnology.net