Talk:Reverse mortgage/Archives/2014

Much too positive
Surely, given the ponzi scheme nature of this, there has to be criticism of this type of thing. Especially given the fact that it could be very easy to trick old people into giving up their house which should have been given to the heirs. Very deceptive, indeed! --Dragon695 (talk) 22:39, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


 * While I find most of the marketing and advertising for reverse mortgages to be loathsome they are not Ponzi schemes. Also it is perhaps arrogant to say that the homes of these "old people" should have been given to their heirs.
 * It's true that a reverse mortgage is a way for someone to tap into their own legacy ... to borrow against their own real estate's value. Whether that value "should" be preserved and passed on to one's heirs is, in fact, a personal and moral decision.   In fact it seems like a nearly perfect way for a retired homeowner to continue to live independently in situations living costs have exceeded pensions, fixed income and cost of living adjustments, etc (short of going back to work, taking in borders, or selling off the home and moving into apartments, smaller accommodations, nursing homes or in with the relatives).  Yes, the loan is paid by the sale of the home and thus decreases the inheritance --- but the principle went to the owner of the home.  (The fact that the interest and fees are high compared to other forms of secured credit is lamentable as well; family members can, of course, make their own counter offers --- if they have the means and the desire to do so). JimD (talk) 07:55, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Which is exactly why if you are a senior looking to take a reverse-mortgage out on your residence you are required to see a third party counselor. It is not meant to trick people into giving away their homes, it is meant as a means to fulfill seniors wants and/or needs. -- Aaron Shepherd

I've added a basic criticism section. The sourcing on it is lousy (I couldn't find the report that was referred to in my source, but I'm willing to momentarily chalk that up to a broken link), but I agree that such a section is merited, as there is such criticism.Tyrenon (talk) 10:16, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

-

I strongly endorse the above comments. I'm shocked by the article - it's just an ADVERTISEMENT.

98.108.242.240 (talk) 02:20, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Cleanup
I've done some work here but it still needs help, mostly citations and a good edit by someone who actually knows the subject.--edi 06:01, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

In the second paragraph, "If the owner receives monthly payments, then the debt on the property increases each month." reads as though making your monthly mortgage payment increases your debt. I'm not sure enough of how this all works to change it myself, but I think it should read "If the lender receives monthly payments, then the debt on the property decreases each month."

Just spent some of my holiday time adding a number of crucial internal wiki references. While some words are basic language to us financial experts, that might not be the same for all readers. I hope my work makes this wiki page more accessible to the general public. --User:BillyKap 29 Dec 2008 —Preceding undated comment was added at 13:50, 29 December 2008 (UTC).

The verbage was correct as previously written. In a Reverse Mortgage, the owner of the home can receive monthly payments from the lender, thus the term "REVERSE MORTGAGE". Imagine a typical mortgage - now commonly referred to as a FOWARD MORTGAGE, but instead of making payments to the mortgage company and increasing your equity, the mortgage company is making payments to you and you are decreasing your equity. I hope that cleared it up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.21.193.94 (talk) 22:13, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Grammar in this article is atrocious. I started some cleanup but quickly became overwhelmed. I don't have that much time on my lunch hour. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.225.130.66 (talk) 19:57, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

I spent some time on the thing today. Hopefully I'll get a chance to work on more of it in the near future.

Out of curiosity, what do people think about making this a US-only article? Someone might merge the info about reverse mortgages in other countries into the articles about financial transactions in those countries. My fear is that the law of secured transactions, banking, etc, is very different in those places, and thus would not make for a fruitful comparison. Also, most of the studies, etc, that I've found are about the US market. --User:FinMan2010 —Preceding undated comment added 19:32, 29 January 2014 (UTC)