Is Tom Selleck Reverse Mortgage Company Selling Snake Oil?

May 20, 2024

We just received this comment on our blog:

It boils down to the saying, If it’s too good to be true, then it is. I watched this actor named Tom Selleck pitching for a reverse mortgage on a TV commercial. That sounds very convincing, even when he swears to have done his homework on the matter and told the truth. An actor worth millions, and before him was another actor, Robert Wagner. Yet, does he really need to do a reverse mortgage on his estate? With his king of dough? Back in the day, they called it snake oil salesmen. How can they look at the camera and say that the house remains yours when you have signed a lien on it? Yes, they give some cash, but at what price? Don’t get me wrong, without demand, there’s no supply. Economics 101. This is the same as payday loans. It’s totally legal yet seizing on the necessity of the poor.

First, let’s understand a reverse mortgage. It’s a loan secured by your home. Like any mortgage, it places a lien on your property. Having a lien doesn’t mean you don’t own your home; it simply means you owe money to the lender.

You still have complete control over your property. You can live in it, make changes, or sell it whenever you want. When you decide to sell, the title company will ensure the lender is paid from the sale proceeds, and the new owner receives a clear title. This process works the same way as traditional (forward) mortgages.

Table of Contents

• Yes, Tom Selleck is a Paid Spokesman

• Addressing Common Misconceptions

• Understanding the Impact of Borrowing from Your Equity

• Exploring All Your Options

• Involving Your Family in the Decision

• Maintaining Control of Your Finances

• Assessing If It’s Right for Your Retirement

Yes, Tom Selleck is a Paid Spokesman

Tom Selleck is a paid spokesman for another reverse mortgage lender. Over the years, several well-known celebrities have also represented reverse mortgage companies. These include Robert Wagner, Henry “The Fonz” Winkler, former US Senator Fred Thompson, and Jerry Orbach from “Law and Order.”

Lesser-known celebrities like Bill Medley from the Righteous Brothers and 1950s pop singer Pat Boone have also appeared in reverse mortgage commercials. Even David Spade has done parody commercials about reverse mortgages. However, it’s important to remember that these are paid actors doing commercials.

Did Tom Selleck do his homework before representing a reverse mortgage company? I can’t say for sure, but I have no reason to doubt him. When my mother asked me about reverse mortgages, I had to admit that I had never originated one despite being a mortgage banking professional for nearly 30 years. I had to research it myself to give her accurate information.

This doesn’t mean I needed or qualified for a reverse mortgage at that time, but I had to learn about it to help my mother. Similarly, I don’t think Mr. Selleck is lying. He likely doesn’t need the loan personally, but if he says he researched the program, I have no reason to doubt his word.

Addressing Common Misconceptions

I would never consider myself a snake oil salesman, and I would never do anything to harm my mom. My mom owned her home outright, but she had a problem. She had enough income to get by each month, but by the middle of the month, she had to stop all extra spending.

She was very active and loved to bowl and golf, but she had to cut back. More importantly, she was delaying necessary home improvements. For example, her aluminum sliding windows were so worn out that they were difficult to open and close. The air conditioning system in her 45-year-old home no longer worked, and she wanted to update her kitchen and bathrooms.

She found a way to fix these issues but wanted my advice since I was the family mortgage banker. We looked into the reverse mortgage terms for her on a modified tenure program. This allowed her to make the necessary improvements and enjoy her home for over 10 years with the loan. She received some cash to do the upgrades and a monthly income from the loan.

Understanding the Impact of Borrowing from Your Equity

So, what is the downside of a reverse mortgage? There was not as much equity when we were forced to sell the home when mom had to leave, so my brother, sister, and I will not get as large an inheritance later. Oh well! That was my mom’s house. She bought and paid for it, and if she had used every dime of her equity to live happily there, I would not have been disappointed.

I am thrilled that my mom could live without monetary concerns with her reverse mortgage. It was immediately after we did her loan that we became a full-time reverse mortgage lender. I have been originating reverse mortgages for almost 20 years now, and I have helped save homes from foreclosure and helped seniors live full lives. I have never been happier as a lender.

But then again, we have always believed that loan is not suitable for everyone from the start. The loan does not help everyone, and we aren’t afraid to tell people when it isn’t the right choice. Our job is to inform, educate, and let borrowers make an informed decision – not sell a product.

The loan can be wrong for several reasons. I’m afraid that’s not right if you still can’t afford to pay your taxes and insurance and live comfortably after the loan closes. If this is a temporary situation, you should seek other options as the fees, including the HUD mortgage insurance, do not make the loan an affordable short-term option.

Exploring All Your Options

If you want to leave a large inheritance for your family, you need to think about a few things. One option is to make payments on the reverse mortgage to prevent the interest from growing. Remember, while you are not required to make payments on a reverse mortgage, you can do so at any time without penalty.

If you don’t plan to stay in your current home, consider downsizing or moving before using your home’s equity. You have control over the interest on the loan. If you don’t want the balance to increase, you can choose to pay the interest monthly. You can also pay more than the interest to reduce the balance or pay less, which will cause the balance to rise more slowly. The choice is yours.

Another option is to talk to your family members about creating a reverse mortgage for you. They could lend you the money, and you would repay them with the home’s equity when you pass away. This way, they benefit too by helping you maintain the home and avoid foreclosure.

Involving Your Family in the Decision

We recommend you talk to your family before finalizing a reverse mortgage. If you are not estranged from your family and have heirs, it’s important to let them know what you are planning. Explain what you are doing, what options they will have, how to exercise them, and make necessary provisions while you are alive and well.

You can sign all the paperwork and express your wishes while you are alive and competent. Waiting until you pass without a family trust or will can cause conflicts among family members. It’s best to set up your heirs with your lenders before you pass so they can communicate with them later.

Maintaining Control of Your Finances

It’s true that nothing is ever free, and borrowing money comes with costs. This applies to all home loans. However, with a reverse mortgage, you do not have to make monthly payments, allowing you to live in your home for life as long as you pay your taxes and insurance.

If you choose to make payments and something unexpected happens, you don’t have to worry about missing a payment one month. There is no negative impact on your credit or risk of foreclosure because there was no required payment in the first place. This is one of the benefits of a reverse mortgage.

With a reverse mortgage, you are not getting free money or a handout. Instead, you are using your home equity to support your living expenses. It’s not a payday loan, bridge loan, or Home Equity Line of Credit. You are not juggling short-term loans.

Assessing If It’s Right for Your Retirement

A reverse mortgage could be the last loan you ever need. If it suits your needs and wants, it might be the perfect solution. If not, it’s best to avoid it. Many knowledgeable borrowers and economists use reverse mortgages when they make sense for them.

We don’t hire celebrity spokespersons because we prefer to offer our borrowers the best loan terms at the lowest possible costs. We encourage you to compare several lenders to find the best deal.

While we don’t use celebrity endorsements, we respect Mr. Selleck’s motives and believe he has done his homework. We’ve done ours, too, and we offer an honest program. It’s a great option for some, but not for everyone. Only you can decide if it’s right for you.

America's #1 Rated Reverse Lender Celebrating 20 Years of Excellence.

TALK TO OUR HUMAN EXPERTS TOLL FREE: 800-565-1722

LAUNCH REVERSE MORTGAGE CALCULATOR

Have a Question About Reverse Mortgages?

Look no further. Michael G. Branson, our CEO, brings a wealth of knowledge directly to you. With a robust 45-year tenure in mortgage banking and 19 years dedicated solely to reverse mortgages, he's the expert you want on your side.

Post your question in the comments below and anticipate a personalized response from Mr. Branson himself, typically within one business day. He's here to illuminate all angles of reverse mortgages, ensuring you're equipped with the knowledge to make informed decisions. Take this opportunity to gain insights from a seasoned professional.

82 Comments on this Article

Magnum
April 10th, 2023

You worked hard for three decades to pay off your ridiculous amortized mortgage interest plus principle, so why not go back into debt again? Was it the 401k or the Annuity bugs who came up with this?

Reply to Magnum
- Michael Branson
  April 16th, 2023
  
  Hello Magnum,
  Do I detect a modicum of hostility in your tone? For some, there is no reason or desire for them to get a reverse mortgage, and to those folks, we say, don't get one! We have always agreed that this loan (like any loan) is not right for everyone, and if it's not suitable for you, there may be no reason for you to get a reverse mortgage.
  However, we have run into many borrowers, both affluent and not so much so, who find that a reverse mortgage makes sense for them. Many borrowers didn't pay off the amortized loan you mentioned. Some borrowers don't have a fully amortized loan and face increasing payments and sometimes balloon payments they are no longer equipped to pay. Many reverse mortgage borrowers use the loan to pay off their existing loans to eliminate their monthly payments. Not all homeowners are fortunate enough to have paid their mortgages off.
  Many times, reverse mortgage borrowers find they need money for home improvements or to augment their income as costs have risen, but their retirement funds/savings or pensions have not kept pace with their needs. And sometimes, we run into people who realize they can't take it with them; their heirs do not need the house or the proceeds from any sale (or they have no heirs) and want to enjoy their lives now. We've even had grandparents who wanted to give gifts to grandchildren and children and wanted to see them enjoy them while they were still here.
  Whatever the reason, the loan is only suitable if it's right for the individual borrower(s), and because it may not be ideal for you, that doesn't make it wrong for them.
  Reply to Michael
  - Sammy F.
    October 4th, 2023
    
    It's not the loan as much as it reveals the predatory nature of the business in the commercial. It's smarmy and aimed at my parents that may in that moment of weakness believe they do need the loan, then couple that with who Mr. Selleck is and his convincing actors performance,hence we have the makings of a trainwreck. You guys are smooth... and SMARMY.
    Reply to Sammy
    - Michael Branson
      October 5th, 2023
      
      Hello Sammy,
      
      We have never attempted to rationalize or defend the use of celebrity spokespersons. We don't do it. It is expensive and would mean we would need to raise our costs to borrowers. But there is nothing wrong with it as it is unethical or illegal, and celebrity spokespersons are used for all sorts of products, whether a loan, a car, a house, or a diet. So, we have not chosen to speak ill of a competitor's decision regarding how to market themselves or the loan as long as they do not give out false information about the loan. We have found no issues with the commercials or any information in them.
      
      We've gotten comments from people who don't like the feel of the commercial (like you), who don't like Tom Selleck or his personal choices with his avocado ranch, who state their complaints but have incorrectly identified the terms of reverse mortgages or any other number of issues that don't have anything to do with reverse mortgages or the information contained in the commercials. To that, we advise folks to compare quotes to see if they want to consider another lender due to the loan terms or visit the Better Business Bureau and check out company ratings to make an informed decision. We will happily oblige with information free of charge and with no obligation. But we are unwilling to join in on attacks against the paid spokesman or the company just because people don't like him or the commercial. If people compare our loans, services, and ratings from borrowers who have used us, people will use our company anyway, but that's up to the borrower(s).
      
      I believe in reverse mortgages and got into them only after years of being a forward or traditional lender, then researching them thoroughly and considering one for my mother when the need arose. She ended up having her reverse mortgage for many years, which was the best thing for her with her circumstances. Does that make it suitable for everyone? No, it doesn't. But that's why we try to give people the opportunity to get as much information as possible and then allow them to make informed decisions. I don't know why you believe your parents are too weak to make their own decisions, and maybe they do need your help, but perhaps you can assist them when and if that time comes. Or maybe you are in the position to supply all the financial aid they will ever need without a reverse mortgage, and that works great for you and your family, but not all families are in that same position. Quite frankly, not all senior homeowners want to feel the need to rely on their kids for funds and would instead get the loan on their own. Whatever the reason, I have seen too many people whose lives were enhanced (like my mom's) or whose homes were saved by reverse mortgages, and I don't consider that a "smarmy" endeavor.
      Reply to Michael
    - Brian K.
      March 8th, 2024
      
      There are so many restrictions in a reverse mortgage, e.g. You can't rent it out if you are in a long-term care home, and on and on. They will sell it out from under you. You are relinking your home. Like Bill Cosby, the masses love them. Canada has Kurl Browning, a former figure skating champion who lives on the Bridle Path in Toronto and has a financial interest plus advertising interest in Reverse mortgages (CHIP ); he advertises internationally but hides, as a non-partisan researcher, I have yet to obtain a contact address for him. Very suspicious. To my knowledge, there is not a government agency or designate that seriously goes after these snake oil entrepreneurs; also in the mix are Insurance companies of all kinds that leave clients in a helpless position. I know, I know that I am probably spinning my wheels. Here is hoping that I am not.
      Reply to Brian
      - Michael Branson
        March 11th, 2024
        
        Hello Brian,
        Normally, I would only consider answering a post like yours if there is no real question. You make several disparaging comments, though, so I think it best to make a couple of points we have made many times.
        Yes, there are many requirements for borrowers of a reverse mortgage. If the borrowers are out of their home for more than a year, it is no longer considered a "temporary" vacancy, and the loan becomes due and payable. But the lender can't "sell it out from under you." That's a gross misrepresentation, as the lender doesn't own the property. The borrower is required to occupy the property, and if the borrower does not, then the lender can call the loan due and payable. At that time, the borrower must take the necessary steps to pay off the loan, either by refinancing the loan, selling the property, or other means with the family. If not, the lender would eventually initiate a foreclosure proceeding, and even then, that would not happen until many months after the lender filed (which would not be until after a year's absence, months of correspondence, and however long it took before the lender discovered that the borrower had left the home).
        We regularly receive correspondence from neighbors of reverse mortgage property owners who have left their homes years before, complaining that the property has fallen into decay, and they want to know how they can contact their lenders to notify them. In 17 years, we have not received a single question from borrowers or family members who had their homes "sold out from under them" because the lender acted 12 months after leaving their homes for medical reasons. All the restrictions with reverse mortgages are carefully disclosed, and borrowers must attend independent counseling by HUD and most state laws before they can even get a reverse mortgage.
        The loan program is highly regulated, and companies like ours go to additional lengths to educate borrowers and their families by answering questions through blogs like this one, so the question that begs to be asked is, why would a government agency regulate the spokesman? The lender is absolutely liable for any and all advertising they use, whether print or media. Every state regulator reviews the lender's advertising during every examination. If there are any violations, the lender must be able to defend their use of ads and then change them and face fines or disciplinary actions for any misleading or inappropriate advertising. A large, nationwide lender may go through 20 or more reviews of their advertising by different state regulators annually. If their advertising violates any laws, is misleading, or fails to be truthful, the lender (not the spokesperson they employ to read their script) faces potential liability, depending on the degree of the violation.
        So again, I see no real question in your post other than that you want to see some government agency assigned to go after the spokesperson. Is that correct? And the basis of that justification is that they make money by being a paid spokesperson. If that were the case, could people sue the spokesperson if they buy a car that turns out to be a lemon because the automaker hired a celebrity to do their commercials? What happens if the price of gold goes down after you buy it while watching a commercial with your favorite actor touting the benefits of owning gold? What if you get a DUI after drinking too much because your favorite celebrity told you to buy a special new beer? And I could go on and on. Celebrities are used to advertising every product under the sun because they are recognized and comfortable in front of a camera, and studies show it works.
        Although many companies use celebrity spokespersons to appeal to consumers for their products, we do not. We believe in giving our borrowers the best possible rate and fees and would need to raise those costs if we had to pay a big name to advertise. But we choose not to. We also don't knock other lenders who believe that's the way they should go. We encourage borrowers to compare, and we believe they will prefer our pricing model better, but if they want to go with a lender because they see a familiar face, that's their right. We don't think anyone should go after the lender or the spokesperson just for that right to choose.
        We have been fact-checking the AAG / Tom Selleck ads for years now (ever since people started complaining about him doing them), and whether you like Mr. Selleck or not, we've not seen anything wrong or misleading in the ads.
        Reply to Michael
    - Patricia L.
      June 23rd, 2024
      
      Swarmy, yes. I didn't realize how bad this plan actually is until recently. My 87 year old disabled friend is losing her home because of a reverse mortgage from Tom Selleck's company. She lives on a low fixed income and couldn't keep up with the repairs, such as needing a new roof, so now she's being evicted and there are almost no options for places for her to go. There isn't enough affordable housing available, and nursing homes are full. It's heartbreaking. Had she sold her home at the time of the financing when home prices were high, she and her husband (who has since passed away) could have bought a smaller place free and clear.
      Reply to Patricia
      - Michael Branson
        June 25th, 2024
        
        Hello Patricia,
        I am very sorry to hear about your friend. I don't know her circumstances, but we don't advocate the loan for anyone who will be so strapped even after they get the loan that they cannot afford the home. However, I think you're laying the blame in the wrong place, and your facts may not be correct.
        If your friend's home was paid for and they didn't take all or most of the funds for the payment of their existing loan, there would be no reason to expect that the reverse mortgage would be so high now that there were not funds still available for repairs. If they did need all the money to pay off the existing loans or for living expenses, that was a decision they made at the time. It also may have changed your narrative about the ability to buy another home for cash after a sale. Chances are they didn't have the equity to do that (or they spent their proceeds, which would not be the fault of the loan).
        Housing prices have been high for some time now, so there may still be an option to sell. The loan has never stopped the couple (now the single borrower) from selling in any market because they, and then she, always own the home, there is no prepayment penalty, and the equity has always belonged to them/her. Expenses and repairs always arise with any home; their/her move to another home would not eliminate the fact that unexpected repairs would occur wherever she lives. Even if they had moved, there is no guarantee that she would not be in a similar position with a different property.
        The reverse mortgage may have made it too easy for her to remain in the home past the time she should have sold the home and left, but you really can't blame that on the loan. People need to constantly assess their situation and, when they realize they can no longer keep up with the maintenance and costs of a home, they need to make the tough call to sell the home and move. The roof didn't suddenly go, and you yourself said she couldn't keep up with the repairs. That's not the fault of the loan, and that didn't happen overnight. People need to take charge and responsibility for their situations before they get to the point where there are no options.
        I am sorry if this sounds harsh to anyone because it is not intended to be a defense of the Tom Selleck commercial or a condemnation of this poor individual who now finds herself in a dire situation. It's more of a wake-up call to anyone contemplating a reverse mortgage or anyone who has one. If you still can't afford the home and the upkeep on the home after you get the loan, I would not suggest it as the right option for you. If your circumstances change after you get the loan, you need to assess your new circumstances to see if it's still the right loan for you. There is never a prepayment penalty, and you can sell at any time if your circumstances change.
        But I think we can all look back over our lives and say, "But if I had only..." I wish I had bought Bitcoin, Amazon, and iPhone stock when it first came out, but I didn't, and I can't blame others for my choices. You only make the best decision you can with the information you have available at the time, but then you must reassess things as time goes on, and the choice about a reverse mortgage is the same. For most people, the loan is the last loan they will ever need (and that's what it is intended to be). But if you or someone you know has a reverse mortgage and the home is in disrepair or your funds are not stretching far enough, it's time to take a good hard look at your situation and your options (which also might include a refinance of your reverse mortgage for more money). Usually, the sooner you come to that realization, the more options you leave yourself.
        Has she contacted any HUD agencies to see what help may be available? What about elder care services? I would also suggest that she contact a senior real estate agent to see what options there are for a sale. If she can't keep up with the repairs/maintenance on the home anyway, it sounds like it's past time to sell.
        I hope your friend finds a viable solution to her dilemma, but remember this: the lender cannot "evict" her. She owns the home. To foreclose, they must go through a long process which gives her several options. If she is unable to take action on her own, perhaps you or a church group or family member can help her? I would recommend that she finds a free legal aid group in her area to help her delay any foreclosure proceedings if possible. Contact a senior real estate professional if she hasn't already done so to determine the current value of the home in its condition and compare that to the amount owed to see if it can be sold at this time. Any equity would still go to your friend (just stopping the foreclosure will not make the home more affordable for her, so she still needs to sell).
        Does she have any family? If so, perhaps they can help with her relocation? I do not know where you are located, but the search parameters for a suitable place to relocate may need to be expanded if there is nothing close by. I would try to bring in as many people as possible to assist.
        Reply to Michael
  - Lynn F.
    January 11th, 2024
    
    I've spent about an hour reading these comments and frankly; I'm kind of stunned. Yes; people actually want to know about Selleck and RM's but that isn't my issue. So many are about these lenders taking advantage but .. don't ALL loans take advantage? Isn't that their job and if you need a loan; as most do, then you're going to pay the piper no matter what kind of loan it is or if there is or isn't a spokesperson or who they are but is that really the issue? Not in my book. Yes; there are seniors who won't consult or allow their kids to "mess in their business" but none said that. Do they not keep an eye on their parents? Are they not involved enough to know their financial situation, what they need? If you don't want them to get a loan; then step up and pay the bills they are struggling to pay and .. get a 2nd loan? If they already can't pay their first loan if the owe; how will adding another loan help? Have you considered buying the house from the parents and giving them a "life long" leaseback? I watched my mom like a hawk and I could tell when she was "down" or "worried" or things weren't getting done. Were they not getting done because she was depressed? or physically unable? or just .. financially unable? What does she have in the refrigerator? Where does she keep her bills and if there appears to be a problem; take a peek. Is her car reliable? In good condition? What meds is she taking and .. how often and .. for what and .. look at the bottle. Is she taking them? If you're not being responsible .. before .. she makes a mistake and have made no real effort then .. don't gripe after she makes one and ONLY because it affects you. You know she's seen the ad. My God; everyone has seen it 1,000 times. Have you asked her if she's ever considered it? I see all the name calling about Selleck; who I have no use for but if you're mom or dad have reached or are reaching that stage where they can be easily take advantage of ... do you know it? If not; why not? My husband and I are 76. I'm still an active Realtor and have many friends in the business and I'm just beginning "shopping" but if your mom doesn't have that advantage then .. why aren't you educating yourself so you can help her? I apologize for my rant but most of what I've read sounded like a bunch of grown kids passing the buck and blaming some yapping star for getting to your mom .. when it's YOUR job to see to it he doesn't .. and no one else does either.
    Reply to Lynn
Herbert P.
July 21st, 2022

You have to listen very closely to what Tom Selleck says about reverse mortgages. He wouldn't do anything to hurt an American senior and you can pay off the loan monthly or when you leave the home. If you can pay monthly, you didn't need money in the first place and guess when you leave the home. When you die. Guess who gets the bill. Your kids. So, Tom Selleck did lie. He wouldn't do anything to hurt a senior but say anything about your kid. I had a friend go through this which opened my eyes on this deal. Borrowers beware. Your kids will face the consequences
Reply to Herbert
- Michael Branson
  July 25th, 2022
  
  Hello Herbert,
  
  Homeowners receive an amortization schedule at the start of the loan and they know pretty well what position the home will be on later down the line. In fact, up until just the last 7 months, the rates have been extremely low for many years and most loans have performed better than the estimates borrower received. I would argue that the kids of those owners were not "hurt". The owners made a decision that they needed to use the equity to remain in the home. And Herbert, wasn't that their call? Didn't they buy the home and pay for it? If they used some or even all of the equity so that they could remain in the home for life, don't they deserve to make that call? I don't know the circumstances of your friend but in most of the cases we have presented to us, the person crying foul the loudest has been living with the senior homeowner(s) for years at a time and are most concerned about no longer having a free place to live.
  
  The reason I would argue that the kids were not hurt by the parent's decision is that the reverse mortgage is a non-recourse loan. That means that even if mom and dad never paid any of the loan for the entire time, they stayed there making no payments (and you make that sound like it's a bad thing when they need the money as you put it) and the balance owed continued to rise, the lender can never look to any other assets for repayment of the loan. That means that the lender or HUD cannot look to any other assets of the estate to repay even if the loan balance is higher than the value of the property. And to make things even better for heirs, regardless of the amount owed, if the heirs want to keep the home, HUD will accept the amount owed or 95% of the current market value of the home, whichever is less, for payment in full for the loan - regardless of how much of a shortfall that may be. But in any case, there is no "bill" for the kids to pay. The loan is due and if they want to refinance the loan with a new loan in their name, they can do so.
  
  So, after they got the reverse mortgage, mom and dad got to live in the home they bought and paid for without having to make a monthly mortgage payment for the rest of their lives and the kids owe nothing and can sell the home, keep it and live there or walk away and owe nothing if they choose. And your contention is that the kids were hurt because mom and dad needed the money to live? So Herbert, there are other options when the homeowners just can't keep up so tell us what you think mom and dad should have done. The kids can pay for their expenses for mom and dad, waiting to be repaid from the sale of the house after they pass and thereby funding a family reverse mortgage. Why didn't your friend do that? The homeowners can sell the home and try to rent somewhere but often the rental is more than the taxes and insurance on their current home. The homeowners can sell and move in with their adult children. Did your friend offer this to mom and dad? Or mom and dad can keep going deeper into debt if they can't keep up until they lose the home to foreclosure in some instances. But in this case, they made the choice that should be theirs to enter into a financial transaction that allows them to live in the home they love and if the children are left with a smaller inheritance, then the kids need to realize that is what they get.
  
  The first reverse mortgage we ever did was for my mom. I never once thought about what I would not be getting as a result of my mom being able to live her live as she deserved in the home she bought and paid for. Do I consider it facing "consequences"? Not a chance. That home was not mine; I didn't buy it and I didn't pay for it (in more ways than one). I guess I just don't understand or agree with the concept that if your parents need their asset to live, somehow the kids got cheated or paid for paid for mom and dad. That belonged to mom and dad to use as they needed and saw fit. But since the loan has safeguards that keep family members from ever having to pay a dime regardless of how much the borrowers borrow; I would need to agree that the kids are not hurt by the parents using their own assets to help support themselves. I am not sticking up for Tom Selleck but I refuse to agree with the concept that if people use their own house or their own money to live and a son or daughter doesn't owe a dime as a result but doesn't "get anything" or as much as a result that they got hurt because mom and dad were able to live.
  Reply to Michael
W Figle
September 29th, 2020

Tom Selleck says,
Or you can pay off your reverse mortgage, in one lump sum, when YOU LEAVE your home!

WHAT!!! When you leave your home?

Where the hell are YOU going - to live?

He - TOM should explain that comment -
or you can pay off your loan in one lump sum
"WHEN YOU LEAVE YOUR HOME" - again, where are we going to live?
Reply to W
- Michael Branson
  September 30th, 2020
  
  Good afternoon,
  
  I cannot comment on a competitor's choice or words on their ad, but I can comment on the program and what it allows.
  You can pay any amount on your reverse mortgage at any time without penalty. This includes monthly, quarterly, annually, or any payments at any time in any amount you choose.
  And if you ever decide you want to repay the loan in full, you may also do that without a prepayment penalty. It does not need to be just "when you leave your home".
  
  I can give you a few examples of this. If you choose to sell your home later to move, you would pay your balance at that time in one lump sum as you were leaving your home (as would be the case if you wanted to move closer to relatives or to buy in a retirement community, needed to buy a home that better suited your needs, etc.).
  However, you might decide you wanted to refinance the loan with a different type of financing. If you did, you still would not be required to pay a prepayment penalty (and in that case, you would not be leaving your home).
  I have even had one customer who won a large lottery payment and paid off the reverse mortgage with the lotto winnings and of course, there was no prepayment penalty then either. He did not leave the home at the time but has since sold the property and moved.
  
  So again, I will not defend or condemn their choice of words, but the terms of the loan allow you to make payments on the loan at any time you choose or make no mortgage payments for as long as you live in the home as your primary residence.
  However, should you move out of the property, either voluntarily or due to permanent medical necessity, the loan becomes due and payable at that time.
  If you should do that, you, your family or your circumstances would have already chosen where you were going to live so then the only question would be what method you or your heirs would use to repay the loan (with other funds available, refinance with a new loan or sell the property).
  Reply to Michael
- Brian L.
  December 10th, 2022
  
  The question of when you leave your home boils down to this:
  1) you are using that home as a rental- HECM loans require you to occupy the home.
  2) you have established permanent residency elsewhere for at least 11 months. Nursing home exits are usually the cause of this. 99% of all mortgages would require you to accelerate payoff if you violate the owner-occupancy status.
  3) you pass.
  In all cases above, the senior usually sells, or will need the proceeds of a sale to continue their treatment or lifestyle. If the senior doesn't do it, the heirs or heirs-apparent usually execute a sale and extinguish the loan obligation.
  If a non-listed spouse is occupying the home, they will usually have to vacate and sell the home as an heir would. In most cases, though, the HECM can be refinanced for minimal costs to add the new spouse to the loan to preserve their rights to stay in the home WITH the HECM in place as long as they choose to occupy, pay taxes and insurance, and maintain the home.
  It's really simple.
  Reply to Brian
Mike
September 24th, 2020

All I know is Tom isn't cheap, those commercials aren't cheap, showing those commercials a million times a day around the country w/Tom in them isn't cheap. They are spending an un-Godly amount of money on letting people know about it.
Reply to Mike
Rick
September 14th, 2020

I looked into a reverse mortgage for my NJ house and found the whole AAG process a scam. They turn you over to another company to deal with and the fees and closing costs were astronomical and once they collect the fees they can turn you away for anything. It seems to be a scam and a redirection buisness. Tom Selleck should be ashamed of his representation of this company. I wound up selling my home and retiring to Virginia.........now i lead a very nice comfortable life!! Shame on AAG!!
Reply to Rick
- Michael Branson
  September 15th, 2020
  
  Hello Rick,
  I am sorry to hear that your experience was an unpleasant one. We are not here to defend or defame a competitor.
  If there was a contention of misrepresentation of any claims made in the reverse mortgage advertising, we would be happy to comment on the veracity or falseness of the ad, but I really cannot comment on their business practices.
  I really am sorry that you do not feel that you were treated with respect or fairly and that's why we urge borrowers to do their homework on honest review sites like the BBB and Google where companies cannot manipulate the ratings, unlike some paid sites.
  We covet our BBB A+ rating and do our utmost to treat all customers honestly and fairly to maintain that rating.
  Reply to Michael
- Gail Macklemore
  April 20th, 2021
  
  It is a scam. My Mom looked into it. They were going to charge her $337 a month to get about $1000. I told my Mom not to do that. Sorry. It is a scam. It's a terrible product.
  Only Blacks and Mexicans get them anyway. No I'm not racist.
  Reply to Gail
  - Michael Branson
    April 21st, 2021
    
    Hello Gail,
    
    I think you should get the printed proposal your mom received and take a good look at it. Today's reverse mortgage rates are around 3% and if mom were only going to get $1,000 per month and no other benefit, she would be starting with a loan balance of just the costs to get the loan. That would put her monthly cost of interest and mortgage insurance accrual at less than $50.
    The only way it could be as high as you claim is if she still has a balance on another loan that is also being paid off with the reverse mortgage proceeds making the starting loan balance higher (but then mom would also no longer have a payment on that loan either so her total position would be better by the $1,000 monthly reverse mortgage payment plus not making the payment on the old loan).
    
    The loan may still not make sense for her and so I am no advocating that she get the loan or pass on it - just that you take the time to educate yourself on the actual loan and the terms. It is when I see posts like yours that I know people are not familiar with the loan, the terms or what is really going on. Reverse mortgages are not right for all people in all instances. But at least if you are going to make that determination, it should come from a review of the actual information and not an emotional reaction.
    
    The reverse mortgage is a loan. It is not a scam, and the interest rates are very competitive. It does have negative amortization meaning the balance rises on the interest accrual when you don't make payments. However, although there is no payment required on a reverse mortgage, borrowers can make a payment of any amount at any time if they so choose.
    These options make the loan much more flexible than any forward loan including Home Equity Lines of Credit. After you look at the different options available to mom, you may decide it is better for you to augment mom's income so that she has money to live on and there is no additional balance rising against her home and that is a great option as well.
    Many "family funded reverse mortgages" take the place of reverse mortgages wherein heirs supply the needed resources for aging homeowners and then are repaid from the sale of the home later. If there are multiple heirs, perhaps you and your siblings can all join to fund a private reverse mortgage for mom, interest free?
    
    This is not always an option though and mom may not have the resources to continue without some additional income. In that case a reverse mortgage may be a good option for her. In any case though, you need to know the actual terms to be able to help your mom make that call and based on what you posted, you do not have a grasp of the actual loan terms or perhaps, mom's situation or both.
    Rather than simply scoffing at an option she is considering; you might be able to offer her an alternative that helps her meet her needs because apparently, she feels she has a need. If you take the time to honestly consider the loan and its terms, you may find that it is the best thing for mom. Maybe not. But either way, the decision should be made based on the best thing for mom and on accurate information.
    Reply to Michael
  - Michael Branson
    April 27th, 2021
    
    I'm sorry Gail because not only do your remarks verify that you are extremely unknowledgeable about the product, but they also tell me that you ARE a racist as well. I am neither Black nor Hispanic nor was my mother who did get a reverse mortgage and was my first introduction to the loan program. Since that time 16 years ago, we have closed thousands of loans for borrowers of all nationalities, races, sexes, and sexual preferences - not just for the people you suggest. But I will leave you with these final thoughts. Math does not lie and the numbers in your original post are wrong. Either you don't understand what you are saying and are unwilling to learn or you were simply not being truthful. Either way, it doesn't help the conversation. We would be willing to work with you and anyone else who had an honest desire to learn the truth to show them correct information so they could make the best decision for their circumstances even if they had a bad opinion of the program, or even when that means that the reverse mortgage is not right for them. But when you don't quote true facts about the situation and then throw in blatant racist comments about the recipients of the loan that are again completely false based on your own concocted, preconceived and racist notions, you show me that you are not sincere or capable of comprehending. I don't know if you are solely trying to elicit a response by posting the most ridiculous comments possible or if you are serious with this but either way, no one needs to hear or read drivel when they are trying to make a life decision on a financial product. We are happy to oblige your deep desire to avoid our product and have blocked you from further comment on our blogs or contact with this company. Have a nice day.
    Reply to Michael
  - Ed R.
    June 30th, 2021
    
    For Gail;
    
    Its OK to state your opinion on any product. That is your right. But, did you really feel it necessary to denigrate any particular group of people just to make a point regarding a product? Why? What the point in doing so?
    
    Besides that being a very ignorant uneducated comment, no, those groups of people you put down, are not the only ones to use the reverse mortgage product. Many Europeans such as myself have successfully used the product to much benefit.
    
    You need to look at individual peoples needs. If for example you have a large home equity with a small amount remaining on your loan and you have no children or don't care about leaving any money from the future sale of your home and the current interest is very low a reverse mortgage is the sweetest thing you can do.
    
    This is true because at worst even if your loan balance balloons, you don't have to pay off any loan balance that exceeds the sale price of the home. If you don't think that is sweet, then I don't think anybody can help you understand financial instruments.
    
    lastly, the worst thing in the world is a racist that can't tell there racist even when the mirror tells them so every day..
    Reply to Ed
  - Joann W.
    March 4th, 2022
    
    Yes, it is a scam, I have first hand knowledge, my sister did a reverse mortgage. They gave her $30, 000. When she pass in 2019. They gave him son 6 months to clean the house out. THEY DID SOME UPGRADES AND SOLD THE HOUSE FOR $162,000 look it up.
    Reply to Joann
    - Michael Branson
      March 4th, 2022
      
      Hello Joanne,
      
      I am not even sure where you are going with that or why you feel that the information you gave me verifies that anyone was scammed. I don't know the entire history of the property or your sister's situation, but I just took a look at the public records and I think that the records show a different story. I can never be 100% sure that I have all the facts correct but I am pretty sure that this is the chain of events as verified by recorded documents.
      Firstly, your sister only got $30,000 because she paid off an existing lien with Citi when she got her reverse mortgage. When you say they only handed her $30,000, that is because they also paid off a loan that was already on the property so she would not get 100% of the reverse mortgage proceeds - they first use whatever is needed to pay off existing loans/liens. According to recorded loan documents, the value of the home in 2015 when she got the loan was $100,000 and she paid off the mortgage she had with Citi that had an original balance of $90,000 (there is no way for me to know what the outstanding balance was).
      
      When your sister passed, the reverse mortgage became due and payable. Her son (your nephew) did not have to get out of the house in 6 months. From the time they discovered her passing, they contact the heirs and ask them what they intend to do; payoff the loan, sell the property or walk. He had the option to sell the property, pay the loan off and keep the property or walk away from the whole thing and owe nothing and the 6-month clock starts ticking from the time the lender starts a foreclosure action with their notices.
      They don't start foreclosure notices immediately because they don't know what the borrower's heirs intend to do so they certainly would not tell him he had to vacate before they knew that was his intention. His mother had the reverse mortgage for 4 or 5 years, was he living with her the entire time? If so, there were no payments due to the lender during that period and it certainly would have been an appropriate time to save money for the eventual requirement of having to refinance the loan if he intended to keep the home.
      All of this was fully disclosed to mom at the onset. I have no knowledge if mom and son every discussed this eventuality but I know that I discussed this many times with my mom about her reverse mortgage and what her wishes were and what we would do. It would surprise me tremendously if mom never said a word to the son, especially if he did live there.
      
      If the heirs do not pay the loan off or sell the property, the lender takes the home back via foreclosure sale as repayment of the debt and the heirs and estate owe nothing even if the house does not sell for enough to repay the loan. If the foreclosure sale is high than the amount owed, the Trustee pays the lender the amount owed and the remaining balance is paid to the estate. The foreclosure sale is a public auction and the winner of that sale is the individual or company who bids the highest for the property. The bidding starts at the amount owed to the lender plus any costs incurred to foreclose or any amounts the lender had to advance to pay taxes, insurance or other expenses on behalf of the borrower. The lender cannot raise this amount and once the bidding starts. In other words, the lender cannot bid against other bidders looking for "a deal".
      If someone outbids the lender, the lender receives the amount owed to the lender and then the lender is out of the process. Since there is only one sale recorded, the lender did not win the auction then resell the property afterwards - a different bidder purchased the home for $111,000 in July of 2019. If the house was worth more money, there was every opportunity for others to bid against the winner of the public auction.
      
      According to listing records, the new owners did a remodel of the property with all new kitchens and bathrooms including stainless steel appliances, granite countertops, new flooring, and offered to pay a buyer's closing costs and their home warranty. They sold the home in December for $162,000. Not uncommon for rehab properties and the son of the borrower who your comments appear to indicate had been living in the home payment free could have done the same thing.
      Also, if you look at the online market sites, the current estimate value ranges from $236,800 to $251,425 depending on whether you choose to look at Zillow or Redfin just 2 Â½ years later due to the appreciation that the market has seen since then. It is also not the lender's or the loan's fault that current values have skyrocketed and the son has not been the beneficiary of these recent increases.
      
      The point I am making is that your sister apparently needed some help with her current mortgage and/or living expenses the reverse mortgage gave it to her. Her son lived in the home with her for at least some of the time and there was no payment due to any lender during that time (I do not know if the son paid any rent to his mom and I do not know if the son added to the expenses that drove mom to believe she needed the help of a reverse mortgage). And your nephew had every opportunity to keep the home but he had to refinance the roughly $100,000 owed in 2019. Had he done so, he would have almost $200,000 equity today.
      The reverse mortgage did not make your sister feel that she needed the help to remain in her home and did not create whatever situation exist that prevented her son from being able to remain in the property. Perhaps her need was so great and immediate she did not consider what would happen when she passed, or perhaps she felt that the time her son would have between the start of the loan and when he would have to refinance would give him ample time to obtain his own financing, I honestly do not know. But the loan is not a scam just because it didn't work out for an heir who was not able to remain in a home forever without making any payments.
      
      The reverse mortgage is not a multigenerational instrument that allows later generations to live in a property for free. It has never been advertised or sold as such and if it was, that then would be a scam. It is a way for seniors to continue to remain in their homes for life without making a mortgage payment. It is not for seniors, their kids and their grandkids, etc. If you can show us where Tom Selleck says that it is intended for multi-generational living without repayment, we will join you in condemnation of the ads but it is not in any of the ads we have ever seen and the program itself requires a tremendous amount of education as well as disclosure explaining all this to people like your sister.
      I really am sorry that her son was not able to continue living in the home but he could have - just not under the terms of his mother's reverse mortgage loan. He just had to get his own loan. Mom knew that when she got the loan and to say that it is a scam now is just not right.
      Reply to Michael
Frank W.
July 16th, 2020

I looked into a reverse mortgage when I was younger. I found that the closing costs were very high and that PMI was required. I decided against applying.
Years later a national, well-known mortgage company contacted me and tried to get me interested in their RM product. I told them about the earlier experience including the amount of the closing costs. The man I talked to said that the rules had changed and that I would be pleasantly surprised. I got a quote and I was surprised but it wasn't pleasant. The closing costs were 25% higher than before. I was irritated and have not investigated an RM again. Now I have 85% equity in my home and do not need a new mortgage; I can pay off the existing mortgage by writing a check at any time.
Reply to Frank
- Michael Branson
  July 17th, 2020
  
  Hello Frank,
  Then you would be one of the people I would recommend not to get the loan! The reverse mortgage is not right for everyone. HUD constantly changes the program and the initial Mortgage Insurance Premium (MIP) did go up for a while but it has lowered it down about 25% again now - but it is still the single largest fee on any reverse mortgage loan.
  In many instances, the lender can often provide credits to offset some or all the costs, but you cannot rely on that because the lender's ability to offer credits depends on the value of the loan. The costs to HUD and third parties are hard costs that if the originator pays, they actually write a check to pay them on your behalf and if they cannot recoup those costs when they complete the loan, it does not make sense to originate the loan.
  The bottom line is that this loan is not right for everyone. We have honestly told that to everyone from the start. If it is not right for your financial goals or needs, I think you are doing the right thing by not pursuing it.
  If you do have the need or if after speaking with a financial planner you can see the merit of the program with your financial plans, I would encourage you to take a look at a company like ours that doesn't employ a national spokesperson with expensive TV advertising to see if the costs are still too prohibitive. You can run your own numbers on the calculator to see if the numbers work for you.
  If you do not want to be contacted, do not use your actual email or phone number. If you still do not like the numbers, then no need to become irritated, you have not lost a thing but 5 minutes of your time. Or not. The choice is up to you.
  Reply to Michael
  - Sheila J.
    March 5th, 2021
    
    With a reverse mortgage. Can you use the money to pay debts and do you pay a closing fee for the reverse mortgage?
    Reply to Sheila
    - Michael Branson
      March 6th, 2021
      
      Hello Sheila,
      
      You can use the money you receive on your reverse mortgage for any purpose you wish. And yes, there are fees associated with reverse mortgages-the highest of which is usually the mortgage insurance premium.
      
      Most of the fees are not paid out of pocket though, they are paid through the loan. The best way to determine if the amount you would receive and if the costs are right for you is to visit our online calculator, put in a very small amount of information and take a look at what you might expect to receive and the costs of that loan for your circumstances.
      
      If it's not right for you, no one will pressure you but if you do want to proceed, we make it easy to start an online application.
      Reply to Michael
Terri O.
July 15th, 2020

Selleck's brothers are realtors/investors. Highly likely he's with them on investments.
Trust him? Absolutely Not. He hired a semi to steal water from county he lives in....said he needed water for avocado plants. His thinking says it all. If it benefits ME what's the problem. No ethics.
No principles.
Reply to Terri
- Michael Branson
  July 15th, 2020
  
  Hello Terri,
  
  I am vaguely familiar with the incident to which you refer and I seem to remember that no finding of guilt was ever determined, that there was some strange program with meters, the water was paid for by one company, later delivered to Tom Selleck's ranch which is legal under the program or some such arrangement but I do not know the particulars.
  I only know that much because I worked with someone years ago with whom I have stayed in contact who owned acreage in Temecula and was going through similar water issues at the time with her family and their Avocados and she was very informed on the situation.
  But that is really neither here nor there. We have no dog in the hunt when it comes to AAG or the commercials with Tom Selleck. This whole blog started with people contacting us and asking us if Tom Selleck was lying or "selling snake oil" as one gentleman put it and so we looked at the ad.
  
  Whether people like Tom Selleck, approve of his choices in life or even his lifestyle are not and will not be topics of conversation by us. We have never hired Mr. Selleck and in fact, we will not hire any celebrity spokesperson because we would rather keep the costs down for our customers.
  Celebrity advertising is expensive and must be paid by someone and we choose to pass savings on to our customers by keeping our costs as low as possible.
  We are not asking you to trust Tom Selleck or come to any conclusions about him one way or the other. We are simply stating that the information contained in the advertisement regarding reverse mortgages is accurate.
  If it were not, we would certainly be willing to point out any factual inaccuracies.
  Reply to Michael
  - Jon W.
    December 22nd, 2020
    
    Thanks for the service you provide to those who are needing an alternative income during their retirement. Your blog offers a unique opportunity for viewers of Selleck's sales pitch to opine on his lack of ethics and supposed criminal behavior. You miss the point that this celebrity (who believes in an entitlement to another county's water) should represent an industry that is no different than the predatory "quick cash" loan businesses. Thanks for providing a forum to the public and you should expect comments such as this.
    John W.
    Reply to Jon
    - Michael Branson
      December 28th, 2020
      
      Hi John,
      
      We have always maintained that we are not here to judge Mr. Selleck's positions on matters, his lifestyle or his employer's choice of spokesperson.
      This entire blog started by a commenter who did not believe the statements he made about the reverse mortgage program and we weighed in on the veracity of the statements in the commercial at that time.
      I am sorry, but I humbly disagree with your characterization of the reverse mortgage industry.
      We are highly regulated and the first reverse mortgage loan I closed after being a mortgage banker for over 30 years and originating only forward, A paper loans was for my own mother.
      It turned out to be the best loan for her and allowed her to live happily and independently in her home for many years that she would not have had the same independence without.
      
      If the loan is not right for you, we encourage you NOT to get it. But for many people, it makes all the sense in the world. Just because it is not right for some does not make it wrong for all.
      The loan can be expensive with the HUD insurance, but that insurance makes the loan available and protects both the borrower and their heirs. Other than the insurance, the costs and interest rates are very similar to many forward loans because they are so tightly regulated.
      And if borrowers can afford to make a payment to keep interest from accruing, even though there are no payments required on a reverse mortgage, borrowers can make any payment at any time they choose up to and including payment in full without penalty.
      Since there is no payment due, you are never late if you choose not to make a payment so you never be afraid of credit problems if it turns out that you cannot make payments during certain times.
      
      Finally, we are not condoning any actions or decisions of our competitor's spokesperson or of our competitor for that matter. We looked at the assertions made in the text of their ad and could find no misleading or false content.
      We have set the record straight when we have seen false or misleading information both by reverse mortgage proponents and opponents, but we found the contents of this ad to be accurate.
      If you do not like the lender or the spokesperson, that is your choice entirely, but we are neutral in this regard and do not express an opinion.
      He made no false or misleading statements in the ad about reverse mortgages though and so we will continue to point out that whether you like him or not, the ad content is accurate.
      Reply to Michael
      - Tim
        October 19th, 2022
        
        Not surprised that ARLO sold out his own mother. Predatory lending at its best. ARLO is a SCUMBAG just like Tom Selleck. Anything to make a buck! Zero ethics!
        Reply to Tim
      - Michael Branson
        October 20th, 2022
        
        I will not get into it with yet one more keyboard warrior coming at us with no facts or figures and who just wants to call people names because you know what they say you accomplish when you wallow in the mud with pigs? You get dirty and the pig likes it! But Tim, since you really don't have any information and you make a personal judgement based on nothing, I would like to educate you. My mother owned her own home. It wasn't mine, she paid for I didn't. She worked hard her whole life and if the equity in the home made her later years more comfortable and more rewarding, she deserved that opportunity, I didn't.
        
        Make a buck? Assume much, Tim? At that time 17 years ago, we had never closed a reverse mortgage and did the loan for no compensation because she helped us to learn about a new product as much as we helped her get the loan she desired. Predatory lending? You obviously do not know the meaning of the term because reverse mortgages are not considered predatory loans (especially when you don't charge for it, and we still offer loans with credits to pay fees with the market allows) but in fact she was not the last borrower we were able to close with no origination fee or for whom we were able to pay many or all of the third-party costs. My mother was able to live in her home for more than a decade with the reverse mortgage augmenting her income with the money she needed to live comfortably, doing the things she wanted to do that she could not do before her reverse mortgage. In addition, her line of credit allowed her to make the improvements to the home she wanted to make.
        
        In fact, from the time my mom got her reverse mortgage until the time she could no longer do so, she was one of our best "salesmen". She could not wait to tell people about her reverse mortgage and the good it did for her and how happy it made her. Do her heirs get less money because she was able to spend some of her equity on herself? Yes, but none of us begrudge her that because it was hers, not ours. We would rather she spent it all than live one day with less than what she could have had trying to scrimp and save so that we would have something instead after she left. The thought of her living with less than she could have just to keep equity for us after she was gone from the home is what sounds "predatory" to me. What I don't understand is what part of that sounds OK to you - to have seniors live with less than that to which they are entitled if there is a way for them to enjoy their time in their house using their own equity? To me, what you suggest sounds predatory.
        
        You know Tim, Tom Selleck is the spokesperson for our competitor, a competitor with whom we often disagree about business practices. We prefer to charge lower rates and fees and we believe in laying it all out on the line and letting an informed borrower make an informed decision instead of paying for a big-name spokesperson which would require us to charge more for the loans. But we still find ourselves defending Tom Sellick sometimes or this lender solely because people like you make wild accusations that just aren't true or are of a personal nature (like this one). We don't know Mr. Sellick or his personal character but we haven't found anything in this lender's commercials with Mr. Sellick that are untrue. If we ever do, we will be the first to point it out! In the meantime, we are not willing to call him names or question his ethics for doing a commercial that is factually accurate (unlike yourself who is making false accusations against us). What kind of personal ethics or morals does it take to do that, Tim?
        Reply to Michael
Carole
June 16th, 2020

My mother took out a reverse mortgage from AAG. After 7 years, she had to leave her home to come to live with us. It took us over 1 year to get her out from under this mortgage. Too many departments to talk to and no direct path to the appropriate department. Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure was a joke. Instead of taking 3 - 6 months for paperwork and action, it too 10 months for notary to show up to our house and even after that, we were sent a letter of overdue payments from a collection agency. We had sent all necessary documents stating that the house would be vacated by May 31 and no one contacted us. I had to initiate all follow up communication. I recommend that anyone getting out of a reverse mortgage get a real estate attorney who is familiar with reverse mortgages. Maybe they can get more attention and push the process forward more rapidly. There is certainly a better solution, but my mother did not feel the need to consult with any of her 4 children before making this terrible decision. Instead of saving worry and concern 7 years earlier, she caused me stress and concern for a year when she had to rely on me to get her clear of this problem.
Reply to Carole
- Michael Branson
  June 18th, 2020
  
  Hello Carole,
  I am sorry for your experience. I cannot begin to rationalize or explain the issues with your situation though. I do not know the time frame this all happened so I cannot say if it was during a time like we are going through now.
  HUD has been only partly staffed and many lenders have had to work with service providers (appraisers, title companies, etc.) who are not always available during this pandemic and there have been times when HUD has been shut down due to congressional funding.
  When a lender accepts a Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure, they must receive approval from HUD and then only after they are certain there are no title issues such as liens on the property. If the lender accepts a Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure rather than completing a foreclosure and there are other title issues such as other liens from other entities, the lender would "inherit" those liens and issues as well by accepting the Deed in Lieu.
  Whereas those lienholders must take other actions to protect their interest in a foreclosure action rather than add it to the lender's liabilities so the lender may not accept a Deed in Lieu and may be forced to complete the foreclosure but they would only know this after thorough research on the title.
  I obviously cannot say if any of these conditions existed, if there were any other issues that arose during this process or if there were just a string of mishaps in your mom's case. Errors can happen on all loans though, not just reverse mortgages.
  I am a mortgage banker and have been for almost 45 years and yet it took almost a full year for me to resolve an issue on my own loans with Wells Fargo Bank. I had paid off one loan with a refinance (both with Wells Fargo Bank) and they never recorded a Reconveyance on the loan they paid off.
  Years later, I tried to put a new home equity line of credit on the house and Wells Fargo wanted me to prove that I didn't still owe the loan that showed outstanding on the title report to the home that they paid off and was with Wells Fargo Bank! It took a full year for them to finally realize that they had used incorrect information on a loan number to file a Reconveyance and the strangest thing is that I had completed another loan in between and the old loan didn't show up on that title report.
  I had no problems with it then.
  Mistakes happen and they are extremely frustrating when it does happen and can be costly. I lost the opportunity to get a loan at a time when rates were lower due to the bank's error and the yearlong frustration was maddening.
  But I do not blame Wells Fargo bank in its entirety or home equity lines of credit for the mistake of one servicing agent back on the original loan that was not reconveyed in a timely manner.
  For this same reason, I think the loan still works for most users even though I would agree with you that mistakes will happen from time to time with any loan product.
  Reply to Michael
  - Krisdaan
    June 30th, 2020
    
    Arlo without responding to all the other drivel, I'd like 2 point out that there has not been any other time like this, no other pandemics that I can recall. Tom Selleck claims this is not his first rodeo, very bold to lie about that he has never been in any Rodeo
    Reply to Krisdaan
    - Michael Branson
      June 30th, 2020
      
      Good afternoon,
      
      I must admit, I was amused by your comments. All drivel aside, you can look up the term that he uses and to which you take offense on any site and not a single one seems to indicate that the phrase is connected to someone's number of attended rodeos. A couple of quick examples are:
      
      Oxford languages:
      not be someone's first rodeo (or not be someone's first time at the rodeo)
      phrase of rodeo
      NORTH AMERICAN
      used to indicate that someone is not naive or inexperienced.
      "I'm a professional. This ain't my first time at the rodeo"
      Urban Dictionary:
      Not my first rodeo
      Literally translated means "this is not the first time I have done this." Applies to dozens of different scenarios. Relays to the recipient that you are experienced and know what you're doing.
      
      In fact, I can't find a single definition on Google that indicates that someone thought that it actually meant that the person using the phrase was speaking about actually having participated in more than one rodeo in the past. I think you may be a little too critical to say he is lying by using a popular and well-understood term such as this.
      
      He owns a ranch with corrals in real life (do not know about horses) and has played roles on TV and in movies during which he spent time on horseback. The only one of the characters of his of which I am aware he played a bronc rider in a rodeo is "Ruby Jean and Joe" and that put him at a rodeo, whether he participated or not. But even if you are going to hold him to the standard of not being able to use a common term unless it is true, we didn't say real life or in the movies now did we? And what does any of this have to do with your statement? Nothing! But the point of my "drivel" is that I still will not call the man a liar when he isn't lying. If I see something, he says that is wrong, I will point it out but the fact that he uses a familiar colloquialism doesn't make him a liar by any stretch of the imagination.
      Reply to Michael
      - William Cervini
        October 21st, 2020
        
        Thank you for clarifying Selleck's rodeo remark. I have no reason to believe him or not believe him. I don't think he was lying.
        Reply to William
- Kay L.
  June 25th, 2020
  
  Carole,
  The "dog's" answer doesn't satisfy me at all. There are very few instances that a reverse mortgage will make sense. I've seen too many of these transactions made by elderly parents who put their trust in a "star" promoting reverse mortgages without consulting their adult children. In most cases, the adult children are left to clean up the mess. The ads are targeting the elderly and should be considered elder abuse. Tom Selleck and other "stars" are PAID and their words (and demeanors) are scripted......and shameful. "I've been around long enough to know" "This is not my first rodeo" "I believe I know what's what"...very folksy sounding and so easy to lure in the elderly. SHAMEFUL!!!
  Reply to Kay
  - Michael Branson
    June 26th, 2020
    
    Hello Kay,
    
    Again, our position is not that you should decide based on the paid spokesperson but that the information that he has presented is accurate.
    We do not believe that anyone should make a financial decision based on the paid spokesperson the company chooses to hire and had this ad misrepresented any of the information regarding reverse mortgages, we would report those facts.
    But the simple truth is that the information in the ads is accurate. You can make your own judgement decisions on what actors should and should not except for jobs, we will not make those types of conclusions if the individual ad is factual and not misleading.
    
    You are stating your opinion and not a fact though when you say that there are very few instances that a reverse mortgage will make sense. If you and your family members are in a position where you do not need to consider the program for your own use, I would agree with you that it doesn't make sense for you, but that doesn't mean it is the same for everyone.
    I have been a mortgage banker for almost 45 years now and the first reverse mortgage I ever originated was for my own mother. It was a fantastic loan for her and allowed her the opportunity to stay in the home she loved and continue to be active with all the activities she wanted to continue for an additional 12 years.
    Did that mean there was less equity when she did finally leave the home? Yes.
    Did that mean that I had a little more to do as her executor? Not really.
    I would have had to do everything I did to finalize her estate whether there was a reverse mortgage on the property or not. Did she enjoy her home more after she obtained her reverse mortgage and was able to make some repairs/updates she so badly needed and wanted and did she enjoy her life more being able to travel a little, go to every Angels baseball game she wanted to go to (she loved her baseball) and continue to bowl in leagues into her 80's? Absolutely!!!
    And that house was hers, not mine. That equity was hers and not mine. If I had to let the bank take the house and there was nothing left (she still had equity because we put her in a plan that didn't take the lump sum but rather a line of credit for repairs and then a monthly payment that gave her enough to do everything she wanted), I would gladly have done so because it made her later retirement years so much more worry-free and allowed her to live instead of merely survive. When mom left her home, the cleanup was still there, and it was not due to the reverse mortgage.
    
    I would encourage all borrowers to get their family members and heirs involved in the process from the start and really make it a family decision. It makes things so much easier when the time comes if family members have been authorized to speak with the lender about the loan, if title issues have been resolved beforehand while the borrowers are still alive and can direct and sign but not every borrower wants their family to know their business. And that is their right if they do not want to bring other family members into the transaction details. Adult children are not required to do anything.
    The loan is non-recourse and if they are not willing to get involved to sell the home or settle the affairs, they can simply walk away and owe nothing. And if they are settling the estate anyway, the reverse mortgage is just a loan that needs to be repaid when the home is sold.
    If family members want to keep the home, yes, they need to determine how they will repay the loan -either by refinancing the existing loan with a new loan in their name or with other funds available to them.
    
    The more you know the better you are equipped to determine if this financial tool is the right decision for you or your family. To make a definitive statement though that it "always" or "seldom" or "in most cases" does or doesn't do something with absolutely no information to back up the claim is also wrong.
    Reply to Michael
Bill
June 13th, 2020

Arlo,

I read your responses to those that wrote in. The ignorance of those casting disfavor on the reverse mortgage vehicle based on the "star" presenting it or incorrect information is shocking. I believe their statements are sincere so I must conclude they have not "done their homework" before commenting about it. This vehicle offers an extra "degree of freedom" that can be beneficial to some or unneeded by others.
Reply to Bill
Undisclosed
June 5th, 2020

Just an opinion...
Just how much money do these actors need, remember that ex GOP senator/actor throwing the dime at the newspaper guy? "It's something Reagan signed into law", no what Reagan sign into law was to protect the lender's interest, not yours.
It is called, I am not lying when I'm telling you the truth, I'm just leaving out information out, for you to extrapolation wrongly. It is the hallmark of the republican.
Yes it's a loan, who owns your car, house with a loan, mortgage, it's called the lender.
Yes, it is loan, the issue here is not how you pay it back, Tom, I can trust you, your paid endorsement.
First just taking out a loan like this can suck a lot of money out, you know like when you buy a house, car, and all those other fees. If you need the money this really puts you in a position where you cannot even begin to pay it back, read it as, locked in. There can be stiff monthly fees, this varies with the companies,
The real problem is the conditions that trigger the payback loan.
Example....
If you break a hip, and then get released from the hospital say 2 weeks, need a nursing home for a few months, for rehab, that can trigger the loan.
You have technically left the home.
You can come home, and that loan is due, no place to live.
You should not take out any loans that your health plays a factor, if indirectly, the loan coming due, and money needed to pay these actors for their public service ads.
Quite frankly I would steer away from any company that puts on back-to-back ads and spends millions and millions of dollars on old actors or a lizard.
Reply to Undisclosed
- Michael Branson
  June 8th, 2020
  
  I am not going to defend the use of actors and others for spokesmen because we do not do it. But I do want to address a couple of your points. Yes, any loan you use to extract money from your home will lower the net value of the home (or any asset).
  Therefore, if you are fortunate enough to not need the loan and you are more concerned about leaving an asset to heirs than you are about using your equity for other purposes, then don't get a loan - any loan! We have made that point over and over and I think Tom Selleck even says that reverse mortgages are not for everyone.
  But your example for a trigger for repayment is incorrect. The loan does become due and payable when you permanently leave the home. You are not penalized for temporary absences for medical reasons for up to 12 months.
  If you are still out of the home after 12 months, HUD feels that the borrower will not be returning and therefore, the loan becomes due at that time. So no borrower can be removed from their home for an absence of two to three months due to medical issues.
  In my conversations with servicers, they have even gone beyond the 12 months on occasion with good communication and reasons beyond the borrowers' control for some longer periods when it was clear that the borrower was going back to the residence but something occurred that was beyond their control to extend their absence.
  If you know that you will not be returning to the home, it is in the borrower's best interest to decide to sell the home or otherwise repay the debt as soon as possible anyway. Why would you want to continue to accrue interest on loan against a home that you would never return to if that was the case?
  If it is not a permanent move, then you have options to work with the lender and if it is, stopping the accrual of interest as soon as possible helps the borrower in the loan run.
  Reply to Michael
Drew
May 19th, 2020

Here is my take on RM, they only lone you about a fourth of your homes worth, banks are banking when you die you're children will not have the money to pay them back, so they can resale for it's worth. Tom knows that, and he trust them, Tom is a paid hack that readers what they tell him, he don't give a crap for you or me, he's about money. Being worth hundreds of millions he's set, he's selling himself as truthful, honest and can be trusted, I trust no one in hellywood period. Don't fall for this government bought politicians backed ripoff, and their pimps.
Reply to Drew
- Michael Branson
  May 19th, 2020
  
  Hi Drew,
  That is a colorful description, even if I do not agree with it. I do agree that Mr. Selleck's reported net worth of $45 Million (not hundreds) is much higher than most anyone likely to be considering the program but being a working person myself, I look at this program from a completely different perspective. I am a mortgage banker and have been for nearly 45 years now.
  I had never even heard of a reverse mortgage when my mother came to me and asked me what I thought of them as she was considering one (being a mortgage banker for about 30 years at that time, I was the "go to" expert in the family if anyone was considering a home loan). I had to tell her honestly that I did not know anything about them, and I would have to investigate it and let her know.
  The more I read about the loan and the more I listened to her about why she wanted to get one, the more it made sense in her case. She needed a lot of work on her home that her small pension would not allow and did not want to go to any of her 3 kids to seek help. And we were all working to keep up our own households and families so I am not sure we could have done all she wanted anyway.
  She needed a new kitchen, new bathrooms, her windows were all aluminum sliders on which the sliders had long since worn out so the window would "thump, thump, thump" in the track if it would open at all, her AC had long since died and her roof was showing signs that it would need repair soon. Her home was 40+ years old and all original. She also wanted new flooring.
  Her reverse mortgage allowed her to do all the repairs and upgrades she wanted; it gave her a monthly income on top of the repairs of just about $1,000 a month that allowed her to also keep doing all the activities she loved (mom was a bowler, loved to go to baseball games and loved to golf).
  She had told me that her pension funds "ran out" about the 15th of each month before she got her reverse mortgage and she had to quit her league and stop going and doing things for lack of funds by the middle of each month. She also told me that she did not run her AC because of the additional electricity costs, and it was getting bad because the windows no longer opened and closed very well, and she had a very difficult time with them.
  Mom was concerned about the loan because she wanted to leave more money to the three of us. We all told her that it was her house, we wanted her to enjoy her time in it and we did not care if she left nothing if she was happy there. As it turned out, by only using a portion of the funds for repairs and then taking a monthly payment instead of a lump sum, when we finally were forced to sell her home, there was still a good amount of equity but we would not have minded if it was all gone. And the most important thing was that she was happy while she was there.
  The loan starts at about 52.4% of the value for 62-year-old borrowers and goes up from there based on the borrowers' age(s) if they are older. It is not a quarter of the value unless you have a much younger spouse who will also be covered by the loan but even a borrower with an 18-year-old spouse
  still receives 31.7% of the value.
  Since it is extremely rare when a borrower aged 62 or over has an 18-year-old spouse, I would say that your characterization of "about a fourth of the homes worth" is also an extreme exaggeration. But just to be clear, the banks do not make money on the foreclosures. Your whole premise that the banks hope the family cannot pay the loan off is totally flawed and I will tell you why.
  Most homes are foreclosed upon when the balance owed is higher than the value of the property and there is a shortfall, not a windfall to be made at sale. If the property value is higher, the heirs can sell the home and keep the money. On those rare occasions when there is less owed than the property is worth, the bank is required by law to sell the home at foreclosure sale in which the opening bid is the amount owed to the bank.
  The bank cannot raise its bid against other bidders to purchase the property for a below market price. If there are multiple other bidders (as there may well be if the property has a lot of equity), they can bid against each other but the bank is out of it after the first bid and they receive their payoff from the proceeds. Anything above and beyond the amount owed is paid to the borrower or their estate by the trustee conducting the sale. The lender does not get to keep that either.
  I understand your distrust of Hollywood. I am only happy that I had the opportunity to see the loan help someone I love so much and since that time, I have originated no other loans but reverse mortgages. I am sorry you have such a low opinion of them, but when used correctly, they can be a very viable financial tool and I am ever thankful for what it allowed my mom to do.
  Reply to Michael
- Kathleen
  May 29th, 2020
  
  As long as Tom Selleck is the spokesman, I would never even consider reverse mortgage. He talks down to Senior Citizens. Inferring we are stupid. Even if this isn't his "first rodeo", he is condescending, egotistical, and
  self-serving,
  Reply to Kathleen
  - Michael Branson
    June 2nd, 2020
    
    Hello Kathleen,
    
    We have never tried to defend or attack Mr. Selleck or the company he represents for his approach or his demeanor.
    We will point out any truths or misinformation that we feel any ads present but his ad is factual in nature. We are sorry you do not like his presentation but again, he does not represent All Reverse Mortgage.
    
    We do not hire a spokesperson to represent All Reverse. We believe that instead of paying money to third parties, we would rather give the best possible rates and terms to our customers and that's why we encourage people to shop around and not make a decision based on listening to a celebrity spokesperson.
    If you visit the HUD site where they post the average interest rates by lender for all HECM loans closed, you can see that the average interest rate for reverse mortgage loans closed by All Reverse were among the lowest in the nation last year. That is not us or some spokesman making claims, that is HUD posting the actual results.
    
    Past performance is not a guarantee of future results though. That is why we encourage borrowers to do their own due diligence and shop around.
    We want to earn your business and we think all borrowers should make sure they are getting the best loan for their circumstances, not the one that works best for the lender. If there is anything with which we can assist you, please do not hesitate to call upon us.
    Reply to Michael
Shar B.
May 14th, 2020

I find it interesting the only person justifying what sellout says is another reverse mortgage lender (ARLO). If you have a house with equity you can get a second mortgage at a reasonable rate and give your heirs a chance to reclaim your house or get the proceeds of the house sale over and above the second mortgage. i am a real estate broker and I strongly advise my clients against it as I have seen time and again at death the house goes to bank and heirs get zero and bank got it for pennies on the dollar. And I used to really like Tom Selleck. Nothing like greed!!!
Reply to Shar
- Michael Branson
  May 15th, 2020
  
  Hi Shar,
  I am sorry to hear that you are a Real Estate Professional and you still do not understand the way the loan works! The borrower and the borrower's heirs own the home, not the bank. The reverse mortgage is a loan that is due and payable once the borrower no longer lives in the home - the bank does not receive the property at that point.
  The heirs can always repay the loan when the borrowers pass and keep the property or sell it, just as they can with any other loan. If there is no equity left, the heirs can walk away, and the lender cannot look to the estate or any heirs to pay any shortfall.
  If there are NO heirs, the bank must foreclose on the loan to protect their interest, but this would be the exact same process if a borrower passes with any other loan and no heirs. The bank would initiate foreclosure if no heirs made any attempt to repay the loan with a refinance or sale and the property would then go to foreclosure sale.
  Then Shar, as a Real Estate Professional yourself, you MUST know how foreclosure sales operate, right? The lender begins the foreclosure with an opening bid which consists of just the amount owed plus costs incurred. It has been a long time since I had to personally conduct a foreclosure, but it always was a law that the lender is not allowed to increase their bid during the sale or to raise it because they think it's a good deal and want to get the house for "pennies on the dollar".
  Unless that law has changed or the laws are different where you live, that does not happen. Let me tell you why. The foreclosure sale is advertised for a prescribed period prior to the sale and then the sale is conducted at an open public auction. Anyone who has watched a home improvement show where they flip houses investors have bought at auction knows how those are conducted.
  If there is equity in the home, there is often activity from other bidders, the high bid wins and the lender receives the amount owed to them (their opening bid). But if there is no equity in the property or the condition of the home is so poor the cost to repair it would create a loss, no one else is likely to bid against the lender's opening bid and then the lender's bid would be successful.
  At that point, the lender would take title to the property based on a Deed Upon Trustee's Sale. Such a "win" usually represents additional losses as the lender then must incur costs to secure and market the home for resale.
  As one who has had a real estate broker's license since 1982 and has been a lender since 1977 and spent a couple years in a servicing department, I can personally attest that lenders seldom get houses for "pennies on the dollar", if ever, during foreclosure sales. We never did. I would not say that there has never been a foreclosure sale that didn't "slip thorough" in which the property sold below market value, but that is extremely rare and after the advent of the property flipping shows, real estate auctions have been more heavily attended than ever.
  Investors routinely read the advertisements and attend auctions with below market valued properties. I find your characterization extremely misleading and as a Real Estate Professional, I know you must know better.
  As for your comments about an equity line of credit, not only does the commercial in question say the loan is not for everyone, but if you go to our website, we specifically say that if you are looking to pass the highest valued asset to heirs, a reverse mortgage may not be your best option in multiple articles. But not everyone can make the payments or qualify for a home equity line of credit.
  And what did you say to your clients when they reached the end of their 10-year draw period when the payment of interest only ended and suddenly the payments doubled or tripled as they entered their repayment period? You now, when the loan fully amortized over the remaining term and they could not afford the new payment? It is at that time we often have borrowers contact us because they are about to lose their homes. Would you still tell them that an equity line of credit was the way to go and that reverse mortgages were so bad?
  It would be great if no one had to borrow money ever to live in the home they loved. Unfortunately, though, not everyone is so lucky. And not everyone has heirs to whom they wish to leave their property to in the first place or heirs who need their inheritance. For those people, the loan does make sense. Making accusatory or overly broad and incorrect comments based on a personal bias and no facts does not do anything positive for anyone.
  People need to look at their own situations and their own goals and make the best decisions possible for their circumstances. Maybe that means no reverse mortgage and buying down to reduce the costs and maintenance of their homes if needed. Maybe it means using a reverse mortgage to buy a new smaller home with no mortgage payment for life. Maybe it means getting the loan and staying where they are. But whatever that choice is, our goal is to provide them the facts about the products (good and bad but honest), give them the information they need to make an educated decision and then support their right to choose.
  Finally, it is not my job to justify or condemn anything Mr. Selleck does or says based on the projects he chooses to accept. We do our best to make sure that correct information is given to the public about reverse mortgage loans. If Mr. Selleck had been incorrect or untruthful in his ad, we would be the first to point it out - but he has not been.
  If you feel he has somehow sold out your confidence in him due to his choices that is your call and I will not even discuss or debate that with you because that is your value system. But if you want to discuss the issues of the loan and what it does and does not do, you do need to come with facts and not false accusations.
  Reply to Michael
Mark Thomas Ruffin
May 13th, 2020

The analogy of the three legged stool being wobbly made me laugh!
You have evidently never even had fifth grade geometry.
Three legs, never wobbles. Four legs can be wobbly.
Just as deceiving as your reverse mortgage.
And you say that this isn't your first Rodeo?
Sounds like it is to me.
Reply to Mark
- Michael Branson
  May 13th, 2020
  
  Hello Mark,
  
  Thank you for the laughs. I am not even sure where to begin answering this comment though. Let me start with a disclaimer. I want to stress that we are not affiliated with Tom Selleck, he is not our spokesman and we did not write the content for his ads. I do not have any reason to defend or attack Mr. Selleck and am willing to comment on the pros and cons of the reverse mortgage product as well as answer those who have written to us to comment on why they believe Mr. Selleck lied in his commercials with specific points regarding reverse mortgages. This is the first time I have had to comment on whether I believe Mr. Selleck's comments on reverse mortgages should be immediately dismissed based on 5th grade geometry though and after researching, I think you are wrong. Let me explain.
  
  I have to admit, the comments you made required me to do an internet search because the three legged stool comment was not even a part of the commercial on which we first commented and which I subsequently reviewed as a result of a blog question we received. I had to go and find that commercial and watch it to see the comment you describe as I am was not familiar with it at all. As have many of his other critics, I believe you have taken his comments out of context. His comments on the three legged stool are obviously not related to the lengths of the legs but the structural integrity of a weaker piece of furniture that he contends the three legged stool is in comparison to a more stable 4-legged chair (as he sits on each and shows the 3 legged stool wobbling under his weight and the better constructed chair firmly supporting him). After all, the definition of wobbling is "move unsteadily from side to side". That movement does not have to be the result of a shorter leg, it can also be caused by a poor/weakened structure. Any carpenter or furniture maker, or consumer who has bought a poorly made stool or chair for that matter, can tell you that.
  
  As I stated, I am not here to defend Mr. Selleck's comments. But when you jump to the conclusion that the information about reverse mortgages must be as deceiving as his "false" geometric assumptions based on such "evidence", I must protest. Reverse mortgages have helped many borrowers. If it is not right for you, I would recommend you not get one. However, even though Mr. Selleck works for a competitor of ours, I certainly would not impugn his integrity or question his education over this choice of word usage when it appears he has used the word correctly and in context with his message. And again, I can see no false information about reverse mortgages in his presentation.
  Reply to Michael
Carol G.
May 8th, 2020

Seriously? This guy has money coming out of his fundament. This commercial is an insult to any of us who might, at some point, need to borrow against our home. I don't know who wrote it, but I never see it without adding "carried out of your home feet first" and some personal insults directed at Selleck, who will clearly never require this service. "Not my first rodeo"??? Puked in my mouth.
Reply to Carol
Thomas H.
May 6th, 2020

Shame on Tom Selleck for pimping this BS product. C'mon Tom you really need the money that bad?
Reply to Thomas
Just A Guy
March 5th, 2020

I know someone that did a reverse mortgage. The owners tried to sell the house but would not sell near the price they wanted as it was not in a good location. They opted to go with a reverse mortgage deciding when they died to leave it to the mortgage company rather than be a pain for their children to deal with.
Reply to Just
- Michael Branson
  March 6th, 2020
  
  Good Morning,
  
  This is not as uncommon as you might think. I have had several customers who either didn't have kids or whose kids already had their own homes and didn't want mom and dad's house or the responsibility to sell it. Still others who have said they wanted to pass on some of their inheritance while they were still living and wanted to see their kids and grandchildren using it it while they were alive to enjoy seeing what they were able to give them. There are a number of reasons why the loan might be good or bad for homeowners and the only one that counts is what is right for you and your circumstances.
  Reply to Michael
Drew
February 21st, 2020

Having Tom tell me he trust them is an insult to my intelligence. Hey Tom will you ever get a RM, heck no, do you think I'm that stupid, so why would you trust them? Tom DONT pee on me and tell me it's raining , you trust them to write you a multimillion $$$$ check or you wouldn't lend your opinion which I wouldn't give a penny for unless you were getting one without the payday. There are a lot of stupid people in this world and AAG is trying to snag their houses before they die, really slimy advertising.
Reply to Drew
- Tony
  March 1st, 2020
  
  Tom selleck is just another liar for big business. He doesn't give a cap for the people. Just another snake oil salesman.
  Reply to Tony
- Cal
  April 7th, 2020
  
  It's too bad that Tom Selleck sold out. I enjoyed some of his shows Magnum PI and blue bloods for example. But now that he has sold out to AAG no reverse mortgage company, I can no longer take him seriously as an actor and I will not watch his programs or shows anymore. Actors should just act and not get involved in politics or sales. It takes away from them as actors and colors them in ways that will adversely affect, they're acting careers.
  Seeing him pitch for reverse mortgage makes me sick to my stomach. It disgusts me! And because he was a good actor it puts them in a position that people will believe him just because he's on bluebloods or something like that and it is not fair to older people who are susceptible to the actors power. There's a lot of people who don't realize that he is a big farce, fake, liar. Reverse mortgage takes advantage of the equity that people have built in their house. If they need money they would be better off just selling their house and taking the money and buying a less expensive one and banking the rest or renting their house out and moving into a smaller house that cost half the rent that they would be making. Or maybe renting a room out in their house. What building a mother-in-law house in the backyard and renting that out. There are a lot of options that are so much better than reverse mortgage. A reverse mortgage is never a good idea!
  Reply to Cal
Bill
February 13th, 2020

Yes, what he says is true. But the truth is that only those with tight budgets will take advantage. Unfortunately, these people are the most vulnerable because they will eventually default and then the creditors move in. It's all about money. And Tom Selleck is making a lot of it.
Reply to Bill
Average Joe
January 10th, 2020

Not honest to have celebrity like Tom Selleck telling people to trust him. Who is he to be trusted? Just another Hollywood celebrity selling his fame to get richer. Does he really care about anyone? I doubt it. Just cares about his future and money.
Reply to Average
- Michael Branson
  January 10th, 2020
  
  We won't speak ill of any other company or how they choose to market, we just don't happen to believe in the same strategy. We won't hire a spokesperson and don't even choose to do television or radio advertising. Our belief is that it is our job to educate borrowers about the facts surrounding reverse mortgages and then let them decide if the loan is right for them or not. We don't believe in high pressure and would rather borrowers not take a reverse mortgage for the right reasons that start one for the wrong reasons or for lack of knowledge.
  We don't want you to get a reverse mortgage because you trust what we tell you, we want you to get the loan, or choose not to get the loan, because after reviewing all the facts (and possibly discussing with your own trusted financial advisors or family), you have decided that the loan is or is not right for your circumstances.
  Reply to Michael
  - HJS
    May 11th, 2020
    
    I notice you don't point out that the interest rate for reverse mortgages is higher than for conventional mortgages & that the up front fees are significant.
    Reply to HJS
    - Michael Branson
      May 11th, 2020
      
      Hello Jay,
      The reverse mortgage we were discussing is a HUD/FHA-insured loan. I don't know how familiar you are with government insured loans, but all FHA loans do have mortgage insurance included with the loans and yes there is both an Initial Mortgage Insurance Premium and an annual renewal associated with the loan.
      But then again, borrowers who choose to utilize FHA financing pay similar insurance costs for standard forward loans made available by government insurance. It is not the least expensive loan available and we often advise borrowers not to do the loan when it is not a good option for their circumstances.
      However, fees or no, I went into considerable explanation to show that for my own mother, it was a fantastic program and allowed her to live comfortably and actively in her home for 13 years before an accident that required her to move into assisted living or I have no doubt she would still be there. And there are proprietary or private programs that do not require mortgage insurance.
      As for the rates, the rates being quoted today are within 1/8th to 1/4% of the rate I was just quoted for a refinance loan on my home.
      When you consider that on a reverse mortgage you can make a payment if you would like, you can make some payment or choose to pay whenever you want without fear of late charges or adverse issues showing on your credit or you can make no payments for as long as you live in the home, I personally do not believe that the rate is high enough to warrant a precautionary statement with such a small difference.
      You do have a recurring mortgage insurance premium for the renewal that, although is not interest, accrues the same so it does add another .5% (one half of one percent) to the amount accruing that you owe. The interest rates on the proprietary loans are often higher but have no mortgage insurance for a renewal either so you need to consider all aspects.
      And finally, we caution all borrowers to do their due diligence. Reverse mortgages are not right for all borrowers - it must be right for the person considering it or they should not get it. We would rather you not do the loan for the right reasons that take the loan for the wrong ones. We have always advocated that borrowers shop around and compare.
      In June of 2015 the Federal Trade Commission published a page on reverse mortgages and it is a great tool at https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0192-reverse-mortgages. They do not try to sell you a reverse mortgage or dissuade you, they merely tell you the truth about the loans.
      We love this approach and we've been doing it since before 2015 but if you look at the link, you will see that the FTC also does not make any value judgement about the rate of interest compared to other loans or comment on the significance of upfront costs - only that they exist.
      I think this puts us in pretty good company about what content we chose to include.
      Reply to Michael
- Ed
  February 5th, 2020
  
  Another greedy arrogant Hollywooder, with a reported net worth of $45 mil who could care less about anyone but himself. How does he sleep at night?
  Reply to Ed
  - Michael Branson
    February 5th, 2020
    
    Hello Ed,
    
    We do not subscribe to the same advertising methodology and prefer to give our borrowers the best possible rates and fees and are happy to report that if you go to HUD's website, we had a lower average interest rate than any top 10 lender listed!
    We feel we can do this because we do not have to pay the salary of a well-known actor as a spokesperson. But having said that, we do not fault Tom Selleck for his right to accept a job representing a reverse mortgage company. The product he is representing has helped millions of Americans and it still has many benefits for senior homeowners when used correctly.
    We are also encouraged that his employer is now using their commercials to do more education about the product as well, informing all homeowners of some of the facts of the program such as the fact that it is a loan with the difference being when you pay it back and in fact, can be repaid at any time in payments or a lump sum without penalty.
    
    Tom Selleck is not the first celebrity who has represented reverse mortgage companies and he most likely will not be the last. If he is truthful in his descriptions and is not lying to the American Public, I see no reason why he should be shamed for giving homeowners information about a viable lending tool.
    Whether or not the loan is best for borrowers based on their circumstances is up to those homeowners. We believe it is our duty to educate people so that they can make an educated decision but that the decision is up to the borrower, not the celebrity spokesperson.
    I would rather a borrower not do a reverse mortgage for the right reason than do the loan for the wrong reason. If Mr. Selleck is always honest in his representation of the program and feels the same way, I hope he sleeps well at night.
    Reply to Michael
  - Drew
    February 27th, 2020
    
    Soundly knowing his bank account is full unlike the fools that need a reverse mortgage.
    Reply to Drew
  - Kenneth H.
    April 20th, 2020
    
    Totally correct Ed. The reverse mortgage gives a much smaller percentage of the real value of the property. The taxes, insurance, repairs etc continue and have to be paid. Better off selling for full value and renting where none of those costs go on. Anyone who has done the real math knows selling and renting makes more sense
    Reply to Kenneth
    - Michael Branson
      April 20th, 2020
      
      You know what Kenneth; you could be right in some cases, but I disagree with the premise that you are correct in all cases. For some people it does make more sense to sell and rent elsewhere. But for many others, renting a comparable home might cost them $2,000 or more a month and there is no chance for appreciation on a rental.
      When you sell and move, you pay the costs to sell the home and most would have to pay capital gains taxes if they did not reinvest within the allotted time period.
      Borrowers who want an asset to pass down to family members can look at reverse mortgage lines of credit on which they draw only what they need and if you contact your tax attorney or accountant, you may find that the sale of the home after the borrower passes by the heirs is treated much more favorably than if you sell it yourself and do not reinvest in another home.
      I can't tell you that for sure though, I am not an accountant or a tax attorney and cannot give you legal or tax advice but I would suggest that you contact a tax professional to see how it would affect your circumstances before making either decision.
      
      And then there is the attachment to the home itself. Many people have been in their home for decades and just do not want to move. How do you place a value on that? Many borrowers' children already have their own homes, and none want to move into their parents' home. In that case, they intend to sell the property when the parents pass anyway.
      Those homeowners have often told us that they just want to remain in the home they know, and love and the reverse mortgage allows many of them to do it. Does that make the loan right for everyone though? No, it does not. But I completely disagree with your statement that "Anyone who has done the math knows selling and renting makes more sense" because it may in some cases but not in others.
      We have always said that the loan must be right for the person looking at it, it is not right for everyone. But then so too would the reverse of that statement also be true. The circumstances for selling must be right for the person considering it, selling, and moving is not right for everyone either. The reverse mortgage gives many senior homeowners the choice they may not otherwise have had.
      Reply to Michael
      - Kenneth Hulse
        April 30th, 2020
        
        you are never going to convince me that selling your home for a fraction of the price instead of keeping money and renting while still paying taxes and insurance and upkeep makes sense. and NO most people are not paying 2000 or more in rent. That is a gross exaggeration. Mortgage and banks are in the business to make the most money they can. So you can say whatever you want, the truth is Selleck, Winkler and the like sold out
        Reply to Kenneth
      - Michael Branson
        May 3rd, 2020
        
        You know what Kenneth, you could be right in some cases but I disagree with the premise that you are correct in all cases. For some people it does make more sense to sell and rent elsewhere. But for many others, renting a comparable home might cost them $2,000 or more a month and there is no chance for appreciation on a rental.
        When you sell and move, you pay the costs to sell the home and most would have to pay capital gains taxes if they did not reinvest within the allotted time period.
        Borrowers who want an asset to pass down to family members can look at reverse mortgage lines of credit on which they draw only what they need and if you contact your tax attorney or accountant, you may find that the sale of the home after the borrower passes by the heirs is treated much more favorably than if you sell it yourself and do not reinvest in another home.
        I can't tell you that for sure though, I am not an accountant or a tax attorney and cannot give you legal or tax advice but I would suggest that you contact a tax professional to see how it would affect your circumstances before making either decision.
        Reply to Michael
  - Kenny
    May 11th, 2020
    
    From pitchman Selleck: "It's a loan, just like any other."
    
    No. It is not a loan just like any other.
    This is a secured loan, secured by your
    family house.
    Reply to Kenny
    - Michael Branson
      May 11th, 2020
      
      Hello Kenneth,
      
      I haven't heard this commercial for a long while and I honestly didn't remember if Tom Selleck says it's a loan like any other loan or if he says it's home loan like any other home loan so I had to look it up on the internet and listen to it again. It is not our commercial, so I was curious.
      He does mention home and mortgage multiple times along with the verbiage of "it's a loan like any other loan" so while he doesn't say "it's a home loan like any other home loan that uses your home for security..." I have not seen any home lenders spell out that the loan uses the house for collateral on the mortgage loan.
      You do not see this level of definition from originators seeking to refinance people's loans, not for banks looking to do Home Equity Lines of Credit or any other typical home lending products but borrowers always know what the loans are for.
      
      So, then you have to ask yourself, is he trying to hide the fact that this is a loan against the home? I cannot even begin to support a position like this.
      Whether you like Mr. Selleck or the position he has taken with this company or program, there is no possible way to misconstrue that this loan is a loan against your home.
      In fact, he repeats that the loan is a home loan or a mortgage loan over and over. I just watched the latest commercial again and found the following:
      
      In the first 30 seconds of the commercial, he talks about the loan being a reverse mortgage loan before he even uses the phrase "it is a loan like any other". By the time the commercial hits the one minute mark, the word mortgage is said 7 times and the word home is used 3 times. And if you are not sure those are definitive labels of this being a home loan, the definition of "Mortgage" is:
      mortgage
      
      noun
      
      a legal agreement by which a bank or other creditor lends money at interest in exchange for taking title of the debtor's property, with the condition that the conveyance of title becomes void upon the payment of the debt.
      
      In the end, you may dislike or disagree with the program and you may not like the fact that Tom Selleck has chosen to become a spokesman for the product.
      But he has not misrepresented it from anything I can see, and I am sorry, but I have to disagree with your taking exception with the fact that the loan is secured by your home.
      If that makes the loan unacceptable to you, I would always respect your right to refuse to take the loan for yourself, but that does not make it wrong for others who may want or need it and it doesn't make the ad deceptive or wrong.
      Reply to Michael
      - Kay L.
        June 25th, 2020
        
        Suck it, DAWG......you're PAID, too.
        Reply to Kay
      - Michael Branson
        June 26th, 2020
        
        Hello again Kay,
        
        Your eloquence and flair for writing are not lost on me but I believe we are all entitled to make a living. Unless you were unemployed all your life and received no compensation for anything at any time, you too were most likely paid for your time and labor at some point in your life if not still now.
        Our point is and always has been if you did not lie, cheat or steal, if you put in an honest day's work or at least completed the task requested of you by your employer, then you were entitled to the pay you earned. We will not blast anyone, not even a competitor for telling the truth.
        If you do not like their method of delivering the message, don't buy their product. I think this comment speaks volumes toward revealing your true feelings on past comments.
        
        I hope your day gets better
        Reply to Michael
    - Tom
      November 8th, 2022
      
      What is meant is it is a loan on your home just like any other loan ie: Home Equity or Traditional Mortgage. Every home loan is secured by a lien against your home.
      Reply to Tom
      - Michael Branson
        November 15th, 2022
        
        Hello Tom,
        
        That is exactly the point. A reverse mortgage is like every other home loan in that it is a lien against the property. There is a Deed or Mortgage (depending on in which state the property is located) and that instrument secures the lien. You aren't giving the house to the lender, and you still own the property. You can sell your home at any time, and you can pay the loan off at any time without penalty. The only difference is that you are not required to make monthly payments on the loan, so the balance grows as the interest accrues rather than decreases as you make monthly payments. Therefore, it operates in reverse of a traditional or forward mortgage/loan.
        
        Too many people think the loan is some sort of program where you sell your house to the bank, or you no longer own the home if you take a reverse mortgage. It is true that if you live in the home for many years, you take the maximum amount of cash from the loan, the interest accrues over time and the house does not significantly appreciate you or your heirs may choose not to keep the home and can let the bank take it at the conclusion but that would be a choice you make. The lender would need to foreclose on the loan, or you or your heirs would need to Deed the property to the lender, it is not automatic. If there is still equity, it makes sense for you or your heirs to either keep the home and pay the loan off with other funds or financing or sell the home to repay the loan with the sale proceeds.
        
        But since the loan becomes due and payable when none of the original borrowers are still living in the home as their primary residence, your heirs would need to make the decision as to what they wanted to do - sell and pay the loan off with the sale proceeds, pay the loan off with funds available to them or refinance the loan with another loan in their name. They cannot remain in the home under the terms of the reverse mortgage. The original borrowers can stay in the home for as long as they live in the home as their primary residence, continue to pay their taxes, insurance, and any other property charges in a timely manner (i.e., HOA Dues) and maintain the home in a reasonable manner.
        Reply to Michael
- Drew
  February 27th, 2020
  
  I'm with you, it angers me these companies finance homes with 30 year mortgages and all those thousands and thousands in interest payments, then want you to pawn your home for a third of it value betting you die and your kids are strapped so they can't redeem the property. This was all made possible by our fine multimillionaire politicians that were payed royally for this BS. I DETEST CROOKS and those who pimp for them.
  Reply to Drew
  - brooklyn15
    April 22nd, 2020
    
    Drew, how right you are.
    Reply to brooklyn15
  - Holly
    May 3rd, 2020
    
    Loved Magnum PI years ago but am so sick of watching Tom Selleck hawk this total rip off. Can't believe he would take such advantage of people who obviously need money (i.e. will never get their house back!)
    Reply to Holly
  - Tom
    November 8th, 2022
    
    Drew- I love all these comments by children of seniors. If your parents are struggling in retirement to pay their bills why don't you help them out so they don't need to do a Reverse Mortgage.
    All these comments are self serving by greedy kids who are worried about their inheritance like they earned it.
    In most cases these seniors supported their children from birth until they left the house (and some after they left) Make your own money and don't think you are entitled to an inheritance.
    If seniors can live a better life by using their home equity and that is THEIR choice God bless them.
    Reply to Tom
    - Michael Branson
      November 14th, 2022
      
      Hello Tom,
      
      I've never used the term "greedy", but I have often felt that there were way too many potential heirs of seniors who felt that the home that their mothers, fathers, grandparents, and other family members was their "birthright" somehow and not the property of the senior homeowner who worked and paid for it. I could not agree with you more in that the home is the property of the person(s) who many times struggled to buy it, pay for it, keep it, maintain it and if it can later make their life/lives more comfortable, then they are the only ones who have the say in whether they should consider a reverse mortgage as a means to remain in the house. I also agree with you that if heirs want to consider helping older or less affluent family members pay for their living expenses without the aid of a reverse mortgage so that they do not need to consider a reverse mortgage, they can make that suggestion but even then, it is entirely up to the homeowner(s) to accept of decline their assistance.
      
      We do recommend that families talk to one another (if they are still on speaking terms) and discuss options but in the end, the decision is up to the homeowners to make. And as you say, if they can live a better life by using their equity and that is what they want to do, it is their choice. We sincerely hope that the seniors and their families both are blessed - but we still believe the senior homeowner has the right to make their own choices on the home they bought and paid for.
      Reply to Michael
    - Brian L.
      December 10th, 2022
      
      Hi Tom, thanks for your statement. There is always a â€˜However'!
      
      In some parts of the country, the job market is super weak, the education levels are very low, and economics simply don't permit folks to purchase their own homes as individuals, so inheritance is a big part of the culture, especially when it comes to a acquiring a home. I ran into many, many examples of this phenomena in parts of Ohio, Alabama, and Louisiana, where homes have been in the family for three or more generations. In fact in a lot of cases, no one has purchased a home in a particular town going back 50 years or more. So refinancing a home is considered to be a sin. Oftentimes the only examples of homes that change hands in some of these places can be found between a homeowner and their pastor, or local judiciary in the case of executing a judgement.
      Reply to Brian

Is Tom Selleck Reverse Mortgage Company Selling Snake Oil?

(65 votes, average: 3.95 out of 5)

Click Here to Rate This

#1 RATED REVERSE LENDER.

ARLO™

In your current area 100 homeowners are currently utilizing reverse mortgages to better enhance their retirement years, with 500,000 nationwide!

Great! It looks like your home value estimate is about

Please provide your estimated home value

The minimum qualifying age for a reverse mortgage is 55

Great News! Your ARLO™ analysis is ready

Is Tom Selleck Reverse Mortgage Company Selling Snake Oil?

Yes, Tom Selleck is a Paid Spokesman

Addressing Common Misconceptions

Understanding the Impact of Borrowing from Your Equity

Exploring All Your Options

Involving Your Family in the Decision

Maintaining Control of Your Finances

Assessing If It’s Right for Your Retirement

Have a Question About Reverse Mortgages?

Leave a Reply to This Article