Utilizing Home Equity. Reverse Mortgage? HELOC?

They are a good deal for the lender. We are keeping our equity and if we ever want to downsize to a condo would use it to pay cash.
 
Teacher Terry said:
They are a good deal for the lender. We are keeping our equity and if we ever want to downsize to a condo would use it to pay cash.
Click to expand...

DH and I don't have children. I love my nieces and nephews but feel no obligation to leave them a home worth 600K plus when we die. I'll be happy to access some of that value while were alive. Different strokes for different folks.
 
I have read too many horror stories about people that forget to pay their yearly taxes once and the banks foreclose. If they both end up in a care facility for more than 3 months even if one person is expected to rehab and go home their house is sold.
 
Teacher Terry said:
I have read too many horror stories about people that forget to pay their yearly taxes once and the banks foreclose. If they both end up in a care facility for more than 3 months even if one person is expected to rehab and go home their house is sold.
Click to expand...

I've heard the horror stories first hand. I'm also a default counselor on reverse mortgages. The lender (as any mortgage lender) will pay the taxes if the homeowner fails to pay them (and there is no money left available under the loan -otherwise the lender will take it from there). They will then ask homeowner to pay it back - they can set up a repayment plan over as long as 5 years - or they can have family help them pay the amount due. They *always* have the right to redeem. The reality is, if you have reached a point where you can't pay the taxes on the home - typically bc of the loss of a spouse and their income - the house should be sold.

At least one of the homeowner's must live in the home 6 months and 1 day during each year. Any homeowner - even the last remaining homeowner can go into hospital or nursing care - the loan does not come due until someone is in such care for 12 consecutive months.
 
JillPill said:
I've heard the horror stories first hand. I'm also a default counselor on reverse mortgages. The lender (as any mortgage lender) will pay the taxes if the homeowner fails to pay them (and there is no money left available under the loan -otherwise the lender will take it from there). They will then ask homeowner to pay it back - they can set up a repayment plan over as long as 5 years - or they can have family help them pay the amount due. They *always* have the right to redeem. The reality is, if you have reached a point where you can't pay the taxes on the home - typically bc of the loss of a spouse and their income - the house should be sold.



At least one of the homeowner's must live in the home 6 months and 1 day during each year. Any homeowner - even the last remaining homeowner can go into hospital or nursing care - the loan does not come due until someone is in such care for 12 consecutive months.
Click to expand...



JillPill, thanks for the clarification. How does the lender verify the occupants/occupancy of the home?

Murf
 
Murf2 said:
JillPill, thanks for the clarification. How does the lender verify the occupants/occupancy of the home?

Murf
Click to expand...

They send a card to be returned once a year by the homeowner . I've had homeowners forget to do this and are in technical default - lender allows them to cure that also.
 
I guess things have changed since I last read the rules. Black owners in a poor neighborhood that was gentrifying forgot to pay their taxes one year and had the money to pay lost their homes. This happened to more people in this neighborhood because the bank wanted these homes. Maybe it was illegal but more than one person got ripped off. They were all in their 80’s so maybe the bank gambled that they wouldn’t get lawyers. In fact seniors in this neighborhood were pursued by the bank offering reverse mortgages because they knew they would get a big pay out down the road.
 
Teacher Terry said:
I guess things have changed since I last read the rules. Black owners in a poor neighborhood that was gentrifying forgot to pay their taxes one year and had the money to pay lost their homes. This happened to more people in this neighborhood because the bank wanted these homes. Maybe it was illegal but more than one person got ripped off. They were all in their 80’s so maybe the bank gambled that they wouldn’t get lawyers. In fact seniors in this neighborhood were pursued by the bank offering reverse mortgages because they knew they would get a big pay out down the road.
Click to expand...

This is very confusing to me Teacher Terry - I have heard this happened too - but it doesn't really make sense. The lender can only get paid back what they actually lent to the homeowner plus the interest that has accrued (and foreclosure fees to foreclosure attorneys who do indeed hike their fees outrageously, IMHO (I am also an attorney who practiced commercial real estate law for 17 years prior to my career change in 2009) . The lender does not get some kind of windfall because the house went up in value. After a sale if there is money after a lender is paid back the homeowner would get that. Maybe 20 plus years ago there was a shared appreciation type loan where a lender would get some of that - but I don't think so.

I have also heard of homeowners being convinced to get these loans out by unscrupulous people looking to do expensive repairs etc.
As a counselor I determine why a homeowner is getting the loan and can withhold a certificate if I believe a homewner is being unduly influenced to get one. The loan cannot go forward without a certificate of counseling from a certified counselor and we are all required to follow the lengthy protocol. My sessions last at minimum 90 minutes but often stretch to 2 hours. Unless a lender or someone was paying off a counselor or something I can't see how they'd get around this.

I understand your suspicion and I'm going to guess some loan servicers have moved very aggressively under prior rules. I'm only stating how the process is supposed to work - and, in my experience, does work. I am sure that there are loan servicers who massively screw this up though. I've seen it too many times in my foreclosure prevention work.
 
Why not just get a regular interest only mortgage, more money at a better interest rate? A Reverse mortgage seems like a more expensive option. JillPill you almost sound like a RM sales person..... Not that you are.
 
ShokWaveRider said:
Why not just get a regular interest only mortgage, more money at a better interest rate? A Reverse mortgage seems like a more expensive option. JillPill you almost sound like a RM sales person..... Not that you are.
Click to expand...

I am absolutely not - just trying to give information gained over 10 years working with folks who get them.
They are expensive to set up (at least the federally insured ones) and interest accrues - the rates right now are between the low and mid 4s to low 5's (I have to admit I don't know what the rates are on helocs these days).
A lot of people I counsel wouldn't necessarily be able to get a HELOC due to low income - just Social Security and sometimes a small pension.

A lot of my clients do not want to *have* to make a payment on a heloc - they can pay the interest on the reverse mortgage if they'd like but usually choose not to. They like the fact that no payments are required and the amount accessible under the creditline they set up increases at the interest rate (which is more attractive than a HELOC which has a set principal amount for whole life of loan - which is also a set term - unlike the reverse mortgage - term ends when last homeowner sells home or dies or goes into nursing home for 12 consecutive months.
 
Last edited:
JillPill said:
This is not true. I am a housing counselor - I've been certified in counseling on reverse mortgages and have done the federally mandated counseling for the last 10 years with approximately 1300 clients during that time.

A reverse mortgage allows you to access a portion of the equity in your home - roughly 50% (based on your age- younger borrowers can borrow a lower percentage than older borrowers). You still own your home - there is just a mortgage accruing interest on what you've borrowed. There are also no pre-payment penalties - you could pay the interest accruing if you are concerned about the your heirs getting less money on the sale of home at your death.

The federally insured loans (the vast majority on the marketplace) have an expensive feature - 2% of the value of home is paid out at closing to the Feds to maintain an insurance fund for the product. There is also an origination fee to the lender that is based on value of home - max is $6000 on homes worth 400K and above. This fee is negotiable with the lender and is often lowered or waived by the lender. There are also normal closings costs - recording fees, lenders title insurance etc. - but you pay those for any loan closing.

The clients I see typically are using them to pay off their current mortgage balances as they retire or accessing money to make up the loss in income after death of a spouse. Some very wealthy people also get them to set up a creditline that increases at the interest rate of the loan - the money accessed is tax free.

the loans are best for people who are pretty sure they don't want to sell before death and are not really concerned about whether heirs will get any money from sale of home on their death - childless couples in that position are ideal - but plenty of parents I counsel say they've done enough for kids and if there is money left over from the sale of home on death - great- but they're not going to lose sleep if there isn't.

There are also some new products coming on the market that don't have the fed insurance and no origination fee - they lend a smaller percentage of the home value though.

I wouldn't write them off until you've fully researched them.
Click to expand...

So it seems the lender gets the house for half the house's value and collects interest to boot. That is my take from your description.
 
ls99 said:
So it seems the lender gets the house for half the house's value and collects interest to boot. That is my take from your description.
Click to expand...

No that's not right. The only money the lender gets at the end of the loan is what the homeowner actually borrowed plus the interest that accrues. (less anything the homeowner may have prepaid)

The lender can only lend up to roughly half the home's value. For a 600K home they could lend up to 300K. So let's say the homeowner is 65 and ready to retire with a 100K left on his mortgage loan balance. Reverse mortgage lends money to pay that off (it must be first and only lien holder) - then there is roughly 200K that homeowner can borrow. They don't have to borrow any of that if they don't want to. Some homeowners simply have that as a creditline they can tap at any time that increases at the interest rate of the loan (IMHO making it more attractive than a HELOC as a "safety net -(200K today is not going to be worth as much when homeowner is 85 and wants to tap it).

Again - lender gets paid back what was borrowed plus interest.
 
Last edited:
JillPill said:
No that's not right. The only money the lender gets at the end of the loan is what the homeowner actually borrowed plus the interest that accrues. (less anything the homeowner may have prepaid)

The lender can only lend up to roughly half the home's value. For a 600K home they could lend up to 300K. So let's say the homeowner is 65 and ready to retire with a 100K left on his mortgage loan balance. Reverse mortgage lends money to pay that off (it must be first and only lien holder) - then there is roughly 200K that homeowner can borrow. They don't have to borrow any of that if they don't want to. Some homeowners simply have that as a creditline they can tap at any time that increases at the interest rate of the loan (IMHO making it more attractive than a HELOC as a "safety net -(200K today is not going to be worth as much when homeowner is 85 and wants to tap it).

Again - lender gets paid back what was borrowed plus interest.
Click to expand...



JillPill, thanks again for answering questions on this seemingly unpopular option.
Are the interest rates adjustable, fixed or are both available? Does the credit limit increase annually? Finally, what are the ongoing expenses to the homeowners other than insurance & property taxes?

Thanks again!
Murf
 
Murf2 said:
JillPill, thanks again for answering questions on this seemingly unpopular option.
Are the interest rates adjustable, fixed or are both available? Does the credit limit increase annually? Finally, what are the ongoing expenses to the homeowners other than insurance & property taxes?

Thanks again!
Murf
Click to expand...

you're welcome Murf.
The federally insured reverse mortgage (HECM) has a fixed rate option as well as an adjustable. There is less money available under the fixed and the single payout occurs at closing
The adjustable options are annual and monthly adjusting. The are tied to the annual LIBOR and monthly LIBOR respectively. The annual has a cap of 2 per year rate adjustment and 5 for the entirety of the loan, monthly is less attractive for people concerned about dramatic changes in interest rate as its cap is 10. (the interest rate therefore can also go down when the LIBOR is lower as during the Great Recession when the annual was hovering around .60 (it is around 2 today)
The creditline growth is same as the loan balance growth - they both increase at the interest rate of the loan daily compounding. Borrowers receive a monthly statement - so they'll be able to see balance growing on loan and credit line (if they choose that option).

The other property charges would be and HOA or condo fees. (because both are "super liens" above mortgages). As with any mortgage - a borrower can't "waste" the property so general upkeep is required.
 
JillPill said:
you're welcome Murf.

The federally insured reverse mortgage (HECM) has a fixed rate option as well as an adjustable. There is less money available under the fixed and the single payout occurs at closing

The adjustable options are annual and monthly adjusting. The are tied to the annual LIBOR and monthly LIBOR respectively. The annual has a cap of 2 per year rate adjustment and 5 for the entirety of the loan, monthly is less attractive for people concerned about dramatic changes in interest rate as its cap is 10. (the interest rate therefore can also go down when the LIBOR is lower as during the Great Recession when the annual was hovering around .60 (it is around 2 today)

The creditline growth is same as the loan balance growth - they both increase at the interest rate of the loan daily compounding. Borrowers receive a monthly statement - so they'll be able to see balance growing on loan and credit line (if they choose that option).



The other property charges would be and HOA or condo fees. (because both are "super liens" above mortgages). As with any mortgage - a borrower can't "waste" the property so general upkeep is required.
Click to expand...



Are there any ongoing fees annually or monthly?

If I were to setup a credit line of 100k & just let it set,how much would it cost me per year to keep it going?

Murf
 
Murf2 said:
Are there any ongoing fees annually or monthly?

If I were to setup a credit line of 100k & just let it set,how much would it cost me per year to keep it going?

Murf
Click to expand...

The lenders are allowed to charge a fee of $35 per month but they generally waive this without the borrower even asking (I haven't seen one on a lender's rate sheet in quite a few years)

If you finance your closing costs you would have a loan balance of those that would grow at the interest rate . You could of course pay the closing costs instead of financing them and have no balance accruing.
 
JillPill said:
The lenders are allowed to charge a fee of $35 per month but they generally waive this without the borrower even asking (I haven't seen one on a lender's rate sheet in quite a few years)

If you finance your closing costs you would have a loan balance of those that would grow at the interest rate . You could of course pay the closing costs instead of financing them and have no balance accruing.
Click to expand...

What do closing costs run (rough estimate is fine)?
 
brewer12345 said:
What do closing costs run (rough estimate is fine)?
Click to expand...

for the federally insured loans (the HECMs) - vast majority on the market (the ones hawked by Tom Selleck)

1. 2% of the value of the home to federal mortgage insurance fund
2. Origination fee to lender - 2% of the first 200,000, plus 1% for values above that up to a max of $6000 for homes worth 400K or above. This fee is negotiable - lenders can (and do) lower and waive it - especially if you're borrowing a lot up front to pay off an existing mortgage
3. regular real estate loan closing costs- lender's title insurance, closing attorney fee, recording fees, appraisal fee etc - roughly $2500-4000 or so (depending on your location)
 
Wow, pretty stiff fees. Thanks.
 
On another note someone I know who is 70 years old just sold her home and bought another using a reverse mortgage for purchase. She put a big down payment down, but got to keep the rest of her former home’s proceeds by using this method. She is not married and has no children. I had never heard of this option.
 
Thanks for clarifying most of my RM questions, JillPill. We have three children, but only one who will inherit from us (long story on the other two). And that child is planning a permanent move to Japan, so is not at all interested in living in our $1.5 million, fully-paid-off home in Hawaii (go figure). We have three grandkids, one permanently in Japan, another who hates Hawaii, & the third is far too young to factor in.

We also have several million in other assets, but I see no reason to NOT take out an RM, which would be repaid when the house is eventually sold. Although we don't really need the cash, at least in the foreseeable future, having it as tappable funds appeals greatly to me...but not to my recently-retired wife. Other than the up-front fees, I can't understand her rather blunt refusal to even consider an RM. No eligible family member wants to live in our piece of paradise, & we plan to stay in it until they bury us, so where is the downside?

Any advice?
 
catii said:
We also have several million in other assets, but I see no reason to NOT take out an RM, which would be repaid when the house is eventually sold. Although we don't really need the cash, at least in the foreseeable future, having it as tappable funds appeals greatly to me...but not to my recently-retired wife. Other than the up-front fees, I can't understand her rather blunt refusal to even consider an RM. No eligible family member wants to live in our piece of paradise, & we plan to stay in it until they bury us, so where is the downside?

Any advice?
Click to expand...

Your wife may be reacting to the bad press that reverse mortgages engendered when they were first introduced. Since then, the laws have tightened and they make sense for some people. I might consider a RM credit line for LTC. I think a RM could be compared to an annuity in that they make sense for some but not others. Also, you need to thoroughly understand the product that you are committing to.
 
Wife has just as much info as I do, as we helped our martial arts Sensei & his wife get an RM, which has worked wonderfully for them. She just can't see it applying for us, since we do have other assets. I haven't tried the LTC approach, though. Thanks for the idea.
 
OP - You could take out a regular loan basically like a cash out refinance. It would have the costs of a regular loan and then you would make payments on it like a regular mortgage (not all interest would be deductible in this scenario). The advantage of this versus a reverse mortgage is that the fees are surely less. On the other hand, you have to make payments like with any other mortgage.

You could also tap equity by selling the house and buying something less expensive.

As for reverse mortgages, I used to be very down on them. Wade Pfau has written a lot about them and believes in some circumstances they do make sense. He advocates in some instances that you should open the reverse mortgage early before you are a situation of desperation.

https://retirementresearcher.com/using-reverse-mortgages-responsible-retirement-income-plan/

I vaguely recall reading something where he indicated that people do better who obtain the mortgage early and make it part of their retirement plan early on.

He also has a book on the subject. I haven't read it, but I note that I can borrow free on Kindle Unlimited.

https://www.amazon.com/Reverse-Mort...LZG7FCA/ref=mt_kindle?_encoding=UTF8&me=&qid=
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
Reverse Mortgage
Replies
11
Views
789
pb4uski
pb4uski
Tranquility Base
Borrowing Against Investment Portfolio For Home Purchase
Replies
15
Views
530
pb4uski
pb4uski
N
Article: 'I'm too young to retire': What forced these workers to retire
2
Replies
46
Views
4K
meleana
M
J
Tax Return- jointly owned home but one deducts everything
Replies
8
Views
648
Montecfo
M
C
$500,000 per couple primary residence exclusion and inflation
2 3 4
Replies
92
Views
5K
almost there
A

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom