What will it cost us? Financial Assessment- Industry Leader Update - HECMWorld.com Skip to content

What will it cost us? Financial Assessment- Industry Leader Update

Reverse Mortgage Industry Financial Assessment

[vimeo id=”27312294″ width=”601″ height=”338″]

Reverse Mortgage Industry Update on Financial Assessment.


Leave a Comment


  1. Shannon and Eric.

    It was obvious that Eric is not the speaker Shannon is BUT that does not matter that much. It was a new and interesting format. But it would be great if you two chose one or two topics and focused solely on those alone.

    Voted as one of the best professors in the country and as a non-MD professor in the Vanderbilt School of Medicine specializing on the interaction of the eye with the mind, Dr. Norden, a neuroscientist, is famous for training professors nationally with the statement: “Teach less while teaching more.” Her point is to cover less material BUT spend more time on the things you do teach.

    The podcast is great for covering a lot of subjects in the way of summary. The Food for Thought is a great way to remind us of some less newsie but pragmatic principles to make our business lives better. This format should be for taking something apart and letting us see it from your eyes. Do not worry about being “reverse mortgage politically correct.” It shows when you do. Say what you mean and have a good time with it. You have the right to your opinion and even if some may not like it, if you are having a good time doing the show and are generally constructive in the way you present your opinion, complaints will be minimal but the vast majority will have fun because you are having a good time doing it. It will be attractive.

    It would have been interesting to hear you guys go through the NRMLA letter and say what you like about it and what you don’t. Use the time to make some constructive “criticsims.” For example, stating it is far too early to be making “hard” rules related to underwriting when default information has yet to be collected and analyzed would have been excellent. The constructive criticism could have been to say that an important part of the letter should have been to state that the standards in the letter should be subject to review and remain flexible especially in the early years of implementation.

    As another point the authors should have been chastised for putting out such a poor quality letter which reflects so badly on all of us. We as an industry can and must do better than that if we want the respect of HUD and members of Congressional staffs who read that letter.

    There is nothing wrong with asking the QUESTION? Will this strategy disqualify the wrong people or more than 5% of applicants? Again going back to the need for modification, this is one of the major factors to consider along with the results over time. If 5% of borrowers are still defaulting after instituting this policy, it sounds like the tests have disqualified the wrong applicants. Again if the default rate drops down to 1%, but 15% of the applicants cannot qualify, that again says modify the standards.

    Finally you guys ended the time excellently. So as you suggested it is time to go get some more applications.

    The first show was a great start to this new format.

    • Dear Critic,

      We really appreciate the constructive inputs…it’s what makes us better. Thank you for taking your time to share some great ideas.

  2. Hey guys,

    A great first production!!!

    Keep up the good work.

  3. I like the new format as well, good job. I very much appreciate you providing the up to date information and insights you do.
    I too think that the financial assesment is a given but at the same time I’m dismayed that so many of our clients haven’t been educated or possibly simply haven’t prepared themselves to deal with the reality of continued financial responsibilities for insurance and taxes. It does provide me with a living on one hand but shows too that there are way too many in our society who have allowed the preparation and planning years slip by, possibly influenced by the governmental example of kicking the can down the road, never really intending to saddle our families with our responsibility but doing so nonetheless by default.

  4. Great production but dis agree.

    Well, If this Financial Tool comes to be as you have mentioned, then I know of at lest 5 clients that I have had in the last few months that would not have been able to qualify for their reverse and thus would now be living on the street or some place else other than their own home. I do loans all over the sate of Texas and some places have values as low as 35K giving the clients just enough to fix the house or pay off the mortgage. Being able to save a client that is going into foreclosure, I guess that would be gone as well? How does this help a Sr.? The reverse program is a great one and can be used for several different reason, saving their home is a big reason to have it and having the Financial Tool is just another Hoop and a cost that the Sr. will have to swallow. This just seems to be another way the goverment is going to try and controll our industry and from what I have been abl to see in the last few years they have really done a very bad job of it.

  5. One last thought is to have FHA insurance FUND FHA only and not try and fund HUD. If what I have been told is true then FHA would have more than enough money or at least brake even on this and all other FHA programs, but as long as HUD is taking any additional funds and putting them in their Greneral Fund it will always be a losing program for ALL FHA

    • Mr. Mulvey,

      Perhaps it would be a good idea if you shared exactly what it is you have heard.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Must Read:


Recent Stories