FDIC Report on Reverse Mortgages: What Consumers and Lenders Should Know

These are highlights from the FDIC release on reverse mortgages found in Supervisory Insights published by the Division of Supervision and Consumer Protection of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.  The reports are designed to promote sound principles and best practices for bank supervision.  This article describes the features of reverse mortgage loan products, identifies key consumer concerns, and provides an overview of potential safety and- soundness and consumer compliance risks that lenders should be prepared to manage when implementing a reverse mortgage loan program.

The U.S. senior citizen population is growing.  Between 1990 and 2000, the number of individuals at least 65 years of age increased from 31.2 million to nearly 35 million. Many more are reaching the minimum social security retirement age; by 2010, more than 50 million people in this country will be at least 62 years old.  Life expectancies are lengthening, creating the need for retirement income to last longer than in previous generations.  However, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, “Efforts to increase personal savings outside pension arrangements seem to have had only marginal success.”  As a result, older people who need additional funds to cover general living expenses are turning to the reverse mortgage lending market in greater numbers.

Historically, the largest investment of the average American household is its primary residence.  A recent study by the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) indicates that more than 80 percent of households over the age of 62 own their own home, with an estimated value of $4 trillion.  Until recently, equity in these homes has not been tapped, but now it represents a likely source of retirement income and an opportunity for significant growth in the reverse mortgage lending industry. 

What Is a Reverse Mortgage?

Reverse mortgage loans are designed for people ages 62 years and older.  This product enables seniors to convert untapped home equity into cash through a lump sum disbursement or through a series of payments from the lender to the borrower, without any periodic repayment of principal or interest. The arrangement is attractive for some seniors who are living on limited, fixed incomes but want to remain in their homes. Repayment is required when there is a “maturity event”—that is, when the borrower dies, sells the house, or no longer occupies it as a principal residence. 

Almost all reverse mortgage lending products are nonrecourse loans: Borrowers are not responsible for deficiency balances if the collateral value is less than the outstanding balance when the loan is repaid.  This situation, known as crossover risk, occurs when the amount of debt increases beyond (crosses over) the value of the collateral. 

Reverse mortgages are fundamentally different from traditional home equity lines of credit (HELOCs), primarily because no periodic payments are required and funds flow from the lender to the borrower.  The servicing and management of this loan product also differ from those of a HELOC. (See Table 1 for a comparison of reverse mortgage loan products and HELOCs.)

Evolution of the Reverse Mortgage

Reverse mortgages have been available for more than 20 years, but consumer demand has been relatively weak because of uncertainty about how this product works.  Consumers often ask the following questions:

Can I retain the title to my house?
What happens if the loan balance exceeds my home’s value?
Will I be able to bequeath my home to my heirs?

Financial institutions have been slow to enter the reverse mortgage lending market because of the unique servicing and risk management challenges.  For example, when the reverse mortgage was first introduced, banks were wary of booking potentially long-term loans that increase over time, do not have a predefined, scheduled repayment stream, and for which there was no established secondary market. Lenders also faced uninsured crossover risk.

However, the market changed in 1988 when the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) launched the Home Equity Conversion Mortgage Insurance Demonstration, a pilot project that eventually was adopted permanently by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).  The outcome was the Home Equity Conversion Mortgage (HECM), a commercially viable loan product with strong consumer protections.  For example, the HECM requires prospective borrowers to complete a preloan counseling program that explains the nature of reverse mortgages, including the risks and costs. 

In addition, the HECM is a nonrecourse credit that protects consumers from crossover risk.  HECMs carry FHA insurance, which protects lenders from this risk.  HECMs have maximum loan amounts based on the location of the collateral (the house).

In some cases, individuals with high value homes desire loans that exceed HECM maximums.  This demand led to the development of private, proprietary programs through which consumers can obtain alternative loan products if they need access to higher equity amounts.  However, crossover risk is a concern with these proprietary programs, as no insurance is available to cover potential collateral deficiencies.  Generally, in these private programs, greater risk translates into higher costs for consumers—lenders must price products to cover the risk of repayment or loss.

The need for higher HECM loan limits was addressed as part of the Housing
and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA), signed into law on July 30, 2008.  The HERA effectively raised the maximum HECM loan amount from a range of $200,160–$362,790 to a new nationwide ceiling of $417,000, by tying the limit to the national conforming limits for Freddie Mac.  Given that the maximum amounts were only recently changed, the impact on the demand for proprietary jumbo loans is not yet known.

In addition to HECMs and proprietary programs, Fannie Mae previously offered the Home Keeper reverse mortgage loan program.  This product featured many of the same consumer protections as the HECM, including the counseling requirement, as well as generally higher maximum loan amounts.  However, the program did not capture a large segment of the market, and Fannie Mae terminated it in September 2008 subsequent to the new loan limits allowed under the HERA. 

Overall, even with the emergence of proprietary programs, more than 90 percent of reverse mortgages are HECMs, and the number of HECMs has increased steadily since 2004.  During HUD’s 2007 fiscal year, 107,558 HECMs were insured by the FHA, an increase of more than 40 percent over the previous year.  As of September 2008, more than 112,000 HECMs had been insured by the FHA during the calendar year.

Consumer Issues

Reverse mortgages benefit consumers by providing a nontaxable source of funds.  This is particularly attractive to seniors who have limited, fixed incomes 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 information about consumers who obtained reverse mortgages, as well as those who opted not to pursue them after completing the required pre-loan counseling.  Survey respondents cited many reasons for deciding not to pursue a reverse mortgage.  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). 

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 products, 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 borrowers 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 individual’s liquid assets for purposes of Medicaid 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 lending, such as hazard or flood insurance.
These prohibitions apply to HECMs but not to products in a proprietary lending program—a fact consumers should consider when choosing a reverse mortgage product.

Another potentially predatory practice is equity-sharing requirements, which are contractual obligations for borrowers to share a portion of any gain—or, in some cases, equity—when the loan is repaid.  These provisions mean additional, 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 component of early reverse mortgage programs developed in the 1990s. A person who chooses a proprietary program should carefully review contracts for the existence of these provisions.

Conclusion

As the U.S. population continues to age and life expectancies lengthen, more people will be living longer in retirement and undoubtedly will need additional sources of long-term income.  This scenario suggests that the demand for reverse mortgages will increase.  Potential borrowers should weigh the pros and cons of this loan product for their particular financial situation, and lenders should take steps to ensure they understand how to identify and manage the risks associated with this product.

This entry was posted on Saturday, December 20th, 2008 at 11:27 am and is filed under Mortgage Basics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.