Non-Recourse Reverse Mortgage Protections Explained
Michael G. Branson, CEO of All Reverse Mortgage, Inc., and moderator of ARLO™, has 45 years of experience in the mortgage banking industry. He has devoted the past 20 years to reverse mortgages exclusively. (License: NMLS# 14040) |
All Reverse Mortgage's editing process includes rigorous fact-checking led by industry experts to ensure all content is accurate and current. This article has been reviewed, edited, and fact-checked by Cliff Auerswald, President and co-creator of ARLO™. (License: NMLS# 14041) |
What is a Non-Recourse reverse mortgage?
The general public often misunderstands the Non-Recourse feature of the reverse mortgage. It has been the topic of a recent lawsuit between AARP and HUD over the interpretation and implementation of it.
A Non-Recourse reverse mortgage means that a borrower can never owe more than their home is worth at the maturity of their reverse mortgage loan. What does this mean, and how does this benefit the consumer? I will give you an example of how advantageous this product feature can be.
An example of a non-recourse protection
For Example, a 66-year-old homeowner with a $500,000 home currently qualifies for $321,000 in available funds on the Fixed-Rate Reverse Mortgage product based on today’s parameters.
Over the life of this Reverse Mortgage, the homeowner’s balance will increase. After 20 years of interest accrual and the homeowner enjoying being payment-free, the balance could exceed $1,000,000.
Their home may have appreciated in that time; it could have stayed the same or even decreased in a possible down real estate market.
The non-recourse feature of the reverse mortgage guarantees that the maximum amount owed on this reverse mortgage at this 20-year mark, if the homeowner were to have passed away, would be whatever the home appraises for in year 20.
Suppose the home appraises for more than $1,000,000, for example. In that case, the heirs to the property can either sell the property to pay off the reverse mortgage and take the proceeds as inheritance, or they can choose to refinance the reverse mortgage with another loan to pay off the balance and keep the home.
The choice is entirely up to the heirs of the property. In a worst-case scenario, let us assume that the property was only worth $500,000 in year 20 when the reverse mortgage borrower passed away.
Under this scenario, the heirs to the property can choose to sell the property, refinance it, or wash their hands of the property completely and leave it to the bank.
Either way, the maximum amount owed is $500,000, and the Lien Holder cannot come after the estate for the difference between the accrued balance and the property’s current value.
In this case, HUD would guarantee the lender’s loss on the loan because the reverse mortgage is a Federally Insured Program.
Amortization example on interest owed
HUD issued Mortgagee Letter 2008-38, which clarified and changed their position on interpreting and implementing the Non-Recourse feature of the reverse mortgage program.
This is where the lawsuit from AARP comes into play
Before this Mortgagee Letter in 2008, the Non-Recourse feature applied to any circumstance involving a maturity event on a reverse mortgage.
When a reverse mortgage loan was deemed due and payable because of a “Maturity Event,” the Non-Recourse feature was in place no matter what the heirs chose to do with the property.
This means that whether the heirs chose to sell the home or refinance the reverse mortgage and keep the property, the max that could be owed to the lender was what the home appraised for then.
However, Mortgagee Letter 2008-38 stated that this would only apply to a bona-fide sale transaction where the heirs or the bank were selling the property to a 3rd party home purchaser.
This prevented the heirs from having the option of refinancing the reverse mortgage with a new loan or coming up with the required funds to pay off the reverse mortgage based on the home’s value at maturity.
For example, if the home appraised at $500,000 and the balance owed on the reverse mortgage was $600,000, the heirs would have to come up with $600,000 if they wanted to keep the home.
This brings me back to the AARP lawsuit. AARP’s lawsuit against HUD was to eliminate this change to how the Non-Recourse feature was interpreted and implemented for reverse mortgage loans. Mortgagee Letter 2011-16 rescinded Mortgagee Letter 2008-38, and HUD has now re-imposed the original Non-Recourse policy.
All homeowners who obtain a Federally Insured reverse mortgage enjoy this peace of mind.
No matter how long someone has a reverse mortgage on their home and how much interest accrues on their loan while enjoying no monthly mortgage payments, they will never be “personally” obligated for the loan’s balance. The individual’s property is the sole collateral for the reverse mortgage loan.
Top FAQs
What happens if the reverse mortgage balance is higher than the property value?
What happens if I live beyond 100 years old?
If I borrow too much, can the bank/servicer go after my heirs or other assets?
How do you get out of a mortgage that is upside down?
If I do a deed in lieu of foreclosure on a reverse mortgage, will it ruin my credit?
ARLO recommends these helpful resources:
March 19th, 2024
March 21st, 2024
July 8th, 2023
July 8th, 2023
January 20th, 2023
January 22nd, 2023
March 2nd, 2022
March 2nd, 2022
November 26th, 2020
November 26th, 2020
September 20th, 2020
September 20th, 2020
March 9th, 2020
March 9th, 2020
February 7th, 2020
February 10th, 2020
September 18th, 2019
September 18th, 2019
August 8th, 2019
August 8th, 2019
June 10th, 2019
June 10th, 2019
June 10th, 2019
June 10th, 2019
November 26th, 2018
November 26th, 2018
November 26th, 2018
August 6th, 2017
April 18th, 2011