He got a reverse mortgage and he thinks when he passes the family gets the home even though we told him that doesn't happen. So we're trying to figure out a way to get out of the reverse mortgage. Can he sign over the house before he passes?
Nope. It’s a done deal. He has the house for life, but once he dies, or no longer lives there (goes to nursing home, for example) the bank owns it. Period. In a sense, he has already “signed over” the house—to the mortgage company. Sorry. My husband is a real estate attorney, and this is what he told me when I asked. Reverse mortgages are generally a bad idea, unless absolutely no other options exist. He might have been better off selling the house and spending down the proceeds, then applying for Medicaid. Too late now, though.
Thank you for your answer. Dad died six years ago after reversing their mortgage two years prior. In the attempt to learn more about her mortgage, Mom insists that I, as an only child, will get the house after she passes. No where have I read or anyone I’ve spoken to has confirmed this.
I guess you would need to read the reverse mortgage contract. I always thought the house would be sold and Mortgage company would get what was owed and fees. If anything left over, went to the beneficiaries. Medicaid is a whole different thing. I think talking to a lawyer would be wise.
I agree, if a home cannot be afforded, it needs to be sold and downsize. Reversed mortgages maybe good for people with no families.
No way out, he is using the money he received from the reverse mortgage, it is the lenders home, they are just letting him live there until he dies or goes into a AL, MC or NH.
I think you overlooked the fact that the person talking about their dad who died 6 years ago, is NOT the original poster, it’s a totally different user ID.
Yes, father can will you the home. But the reverse mortgage money will have to be repaid to the Reverse Mortgage Co. which paid him out money monthly with the home as collateral. So it works like this. Dad gets a Reverse Mortgage on his home which pays him 200.00 a month for instance (virtually a loan) with the home as collateral. Upon Dad's death the Mortgage money is owed to the Company. If Dad got 200.00 a month for a year and then died, there is 200.00 x 12 months plus fees/interest/whatever owed to the Mortgage Co. So the home will not be inherited free and clear. When my partner's Mom died he owed the mortgage company 50.000.00 which had been paid out to his Mom. That was paid. The remainder was the money of my husband, upon sale of the home, as he was listed to inherit in the will. Go to YouTube and type in Reverse Mortgage and many will explain it in black and white. Also, do know, you shouldn't take the knowledge or advice of the forum folks, brilliant as we all are in matters of law, money, other crucial things. Please have these things explained to you by the company or by your own lawyer. In all these matters it is critical that you get it right. Wishing you luck. You can also look up "what is a reverse mortgage" on google and be certain you don't click on an ad, but on a .org organization that is there to explain it to you.
I have been thinking about this. I would question being willed a house with this kind of debt. Lets say the total money lent and fees are more than the house ends up being worth? Is the beneficiary responsible for the debt? Or is the RM set up that they are take a loss.
I ask because my brother inherited Moms house but didn't want the responsibility of the debt that had accumulated in taxes. We had to use a lawyer to have the house put back into the estate. When it sold all debts were satisfied.
The person who is willed the house isn’t response. A reverse mortgage is a loan. Responsibility for that loan doesn’t pass to anyone. It stays with the homeowner and the home.
When I reviewed a reverse mortgage for someone a few years back, it was a negatively amortized loan. I haven't reviewed any other company's loan documents, but I saw enough to recommend that the person NEVER enter into a reverse mortgage commitment.
Based on what I read, the initial advance begins drawing interest immediately. Using a basic formula to illustrate how this works, the next month the principal balance includes the advance (A) plus the first month's interest (I no. 1). Then the next month the amount outstanding includes A, plus I no. 1 and I no. 2 - in other words, the outstanding advance, plus interest for the next two months.
Each month interest is applied on the previous month's outstanding balance, and so it goes as interest adds up and up quicker than eating a dozen chocolate bars adds weight.
If someone is in need of funds and wants to get a mortgage, a standard equity line is better. I don't see how anyone who does need money can get an RM and ever think of paying it off, unless that person anticipates winning a lottery or finding a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow.
Perhaps these egregious terms no longer apply to RMs; I don't know and would only consider getting one if I was broke and needed money desperately, such as for end of life medical care, or if I wanted to "stick it to" an RM lender, with deliberate intention to use the money, not worry about paying it back, and let the lender have the house.
Sbopie, your father would retain title to the home, SUBJECT to the interest of the reverse mortgage lender. Title is NOT transferred when the mortgage is recorded. If it was, there would be no purpose whatsoever for the owner to make mortgage payments.
However, you or the family would need to be able to pay off the RM entirely in order to discharge it completely.
And if you or your father did want to do this, you/he should hire a transactional attorney with experience in RMs, to ensure that it is entirely discharged and the title becomes free and clear of that obligation.
Yes. You are exactly right. Dave Ramsey, the financial guru will gladly give you his diatribe against reverse mortgages on youtube as well. It isn't a very wise loan. BUT, if you are a senior who is somewhat cash strapped for the lifestyle you lead and you do not care if you leave your home to someone,but do wish to stay in your home, it can work, financially unwise tho it might be. It worked very well for my Partner's mother. She had her monthly income, not enough to stay in her home, hire in some care for herself and have groceries delivered and etc. Her reverse mortgage gave her enough that she was able to stay in her home and pass in her home. It worked well, was what she COULD do, and she was happy until the end watching the wild pigs come up to drink out of her tiny hose fed pond in the back yard. It is almost always getting good financial advice, then making the best decision you can for YOU. Not always best for your heirs and so on. But....
I agree, if a home cannot be afforded, it needs to be sold and downsize. Reversed mortgages maybe good for people with no families.
But the reverse mortgage money will have to be repaid to the Reverse Mortgage Co. which paid him out money monthly with the home as collateral. So it works like this. Dad gets a Reverse Mortgage on his home which pays him 200.00 a month for instance (virtually a loan) with the home as collateral.
Upon Dad's death the Mortgage money is owed to the Company. If Dad got 200.00 a month for a year and then died, there is 200.00 x 12 months plus fees/interest/whatever owed to the Mortgage Co.
So the home will not be inherited free and clear.
When my partner's Mom died he owed the mortgage company 50.000.00 which had been paid out to his Mom. That was paid. The remainder was the money of my husband, upon sale of the home, as he was listed to inherit in the will.
Go to YouTube and type in Reverse Mortgage and many will explain it in black and white.
Also, do know, you shouldn't take the knowledge or advice of the forum folks, brilliant as we all are in matters of law, money, other crucial things. Please have these things explained to you by the company or by your own lawyer. In all these matters it is critical that you get it right. Wishing you luck.
You can also look up "what is a reverse mortgage" on google and be certain you don't click on an ad, but on a .org organization that is there to explain it to you.
I ask because my brother inherited Moms house but didn't want the responsibility of the debt that had accumulated in taxes. We had to use a lawyer to have the house put back into the estate. When it sold all debts were satisfied.
Based on what I read, the initial advance begins drawing interest immediately. Using a basic formula to illustrate how this works, the next month the principal balance includes the advance (A) plus the first month's interest (I no. 1). Then the next month the amount outstanding includes A, plus I no. 1 and I no. 2 - in other words, the outstanding advance, plus interest for the next two months.
Each month interest is applied on the previous month's outstanding balance, and so it goes as interest adds up and up quicker than eating a dozen chocolate bars adds weight.
If someone is in need of funds and wants to get a mortgage, a standard equity line is better. I don't see how anyone who does need money can get an RM and ever think of paying it off, unless that person anticipates winning a lottery or finding a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow.
Perhaps these egregious terms no longer apply to RMs; I don't know and would only consider getting one if I was broke and needed money desperately, such as for end of life medical care, or if I wanted to "stick it to" an RM lender, with deliberate intention to use the money, not worry about paying it back, and let the lender have the house.
Sbopie, your father would retain title to the home, SUBJECT to the interest of the reverse mortgage lender. Title is NOT transferred when the mortgage is recorded. If it was, there would be no purpose whatsoever for the owner to make mortgage payments.
However, you or the family would need to be able to pay off the RM entirely in order to discharge it completely.
And if you or your father did want to do this, you/he should hire a transactional attorney with experience in RMs, to ensure that it is entirely discharged and the title becomes free and clear of that obligation.
It is almost always getting good financial advice, then making the best decision you can for YOU. Not always best for your heirs and so on. But....