Sign up, and you'll be able to customize your font size and more! Sign up
Sep 16, 2014
2:11:31pm
Here's the most common situation:
Many, many retirees are cash-poor. They have equity in their houses, but not much else to live on, and they have mortgage payments that are an ever-increasing percentage of their incomes. Why not live on the equity and wipe out the single largest monthly debit? So what if it runs out? The way these are structured, you cannot lose the home, and you won't be evicted. The only people that will ever benefit from the home equity are the people that can most afford to miss out on it - the working children of the retirees. For people in this situation, and that's nearly everyone I know (I don't live on the benches, let's just say), a reverse mortgage is a godsend.

Now, there are people that have sufficient reserves and income to do what they want, and for those people it's silly to drain equity from their houses when they haven't any real need for it. Those people shouldn't do reverse mortgages.
TheDash
Bio page
TheDash
Joined
Nov 6, 2006
Last login
Apr 21, 2024
Total posts
6,908 (7 FO)