income reverse loans
An annuity should never be purchased using money from a reverse loan, but in the past there were times when a reverse loan borrower would unwisely do just that and sometimes these vulnerable seniors were (for lack of a less sensitive term) “robbed”.
But what has happened since then to protect seniors from this kind of scam?
In 1987 Congress passed the FHA Insurance and Uniform Lending practices and the FHA insurance bill that would insure Reverse mortgages.
The first reverse mortgage to be insured by FHA was in 1989 and they continue to oversee this program very closely as an added protection to seniors and since that time additional oversight has come from Housing & Economic Recovery Act, HUD, Ginnie Mae, the National Reverse Lenders Association and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Prior to this time, reverse loans were created and offered by other entities such as insurance companies in exchange for a portion of the equity of the borrower’s home when they passed away and at very high interest rates.
And quite often an annuity was tied to this transaction by obligating the borrower to use the funds from the reverse loan to purchase this insurance product.
Is this an acceptable suggestion for a senior to utilize in their “later” years?
In my previous post I mentioned that since the 1990’s, “Gray” divorce ( As senior divorce is often referred to) has increased. As a matter of fact it has tripled and more seniors are splitting up than in any previous time.
More often than not, the “wife” will want to continue to live in the home but is unable to qualify for a traditional loan due to lack of income and cash reserves.
So what happens if one of them wants to keep the home and continue to live in it?
More than likely they won’t have enough income to qualify for a traditional loan and even if they are going to receive spousal support, a lender will not use it for qualifying purposes because there will be no history of it’s receipt to the spouse who has been awarded support.
And what would be her option?
Depending on her age, the value of the subject property and if there are any mortgages on it, she may be able to qualify for a reverse mortgage, pay off the spouse and continue to live in her home.
Her only responsibilities would be to continue to pay property taxes, home insurance and any HOA fees and keep the home in good repair.
Reverse loans are a financial tool. A tool to leverage the longevity of a retirement portfolio, purchase a home, provide additional income for on going expenses and other aging concerns.
And it’s also an excellent tool that can help the pain of divorce be just a little bit less and allow one of the divorcing couples to remain living in their home and not be displaced.
My description is quite simplistic in this post and the borrower does need to qualify on their residual income, but overall using a Reverse mortgage as part an option to retain the property in a divorce is a very good suggestion and should be considered in the settlement process.