National Consumer Law Center Advocates Urge HUD to Take Immediate Action to Reduce Foreclosures on Widows and Widowers of Reverse Mortgage Borrowers

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: November 27, 2018

National Consumer Law Center: Jan Kruse (jkruse@nclc.org), (617) 542-8010

Washington, D.C. — Reverse mortgages are intended to help elders age in their homes. Yet, across the country, widows and widowers are losing their homes because of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)’s failure to prevent foreclosures on reverse mortgages that their now-deceased spouses previously obtained. Advocates at the National Consumer Law Center today issued a new report showing the harm that HUD’s practice causes to widows and widowers, and urging HUD to take immediate action to better inform reverse mortgage borrowers and their spouses about options to avoid foreclosure on a non-borrowing spouse, remove arbitrary and unrealistic deadlines for lenders to elect to participate in the program, and ensure that the program can work effectively to help non-borrowing spouses stay in their homes.

“Failing to take reasonable steps to protect widows and widowers from a foreclosure risk caused by HUD’s own unlawful regulation is not only unjust, it’s bad policy,” said Sarah Mancini, an attorney with the National Consumer Law Center. “A significant number of older homeowners now face the loss of their homes as well as their community support networks due to HUD’s harsh deadlines and a lack of information.”

Reverse mortgage loans are designed to make it easier for older homeowners to age in place by allowing them to borrow against the equity in the home without the risk of displacement. The proceeds of a reverse mortgage can be taken as a lump sum, a line of credit, or a stream of monthly payments. So long as the borrower continues to occupy the home as his or her principal residence, the borrower must pay property taxes and the homeowner’s insurance premium, but need not make payments of principal or interest on the loan. Unlike most mortgages, where the balance goes down over time, with a reverse mortgage the loan balance grows over time as the interest is added to the principal balance (hence the name “reverse” mortgage). The full loan balance becomes due and payable upon a triggering event – in most cases, the death of the last remaining borrower.

Congress specified that HUD could only insure loans that protected both the homeowner and any spouse from displacement. However, despite this requirement, HUD issued regulations that required lenders to use form loan documents that made the loans due and payable upon the death of the borrower – ignoring any spouse who was not included as a borrower on the loan. This created an incentive for some lenders and mortgage brokers to encourage married couples to leave the younger spouse off the loan. Most couples who opted to take out a reverse mortgage in the name of only one of the spouses had no idea that the non-borrowing spouse would face foreclosure and eviction because the loan would become due and payable upon the death of the borrowing spouse.

In response to litigation, HUD changed its regulations for new reverse mortgages issued after August 2014, but pre-2014 loans still go into foreclosure unless the surviving spouse can take critical steps within a very short time after the death of the borrowing spouse. The surviving spouses are often unaware of the significant substantive requirements and short deadlines, and may be overwhelmed by the many demands they face after losing a loved one.

“HUD should require servicers to regularly inform borrowers and their spouses of the proper procedures to remain in their homes,” said Mancini. “Right now, too many spouses have no idea that options exist until it is too late.”

NCLC attorneys recommend the following changes in order to make assistance for reverse mortgage borrowers more accessible and viable for non-borrowing spouses.

  • HUD should remove unnecessary deadlines for the program or, at a minimum, provide waivers of deadlines in appropriate cases.
  • HUD should require servicers to communicate clearly with borrowers and non-borrowing spouses about the program and steps needed to qualify for the program, beginning, even before the borrower’s death.
  • HUD should allow additional time for non-borrowing spouses to cure a default on property taxes or insurance when spouses are actively attempting to repay these charges or are eligible for help through an assistance program such as a Hardest Hit Funds program.
  • HUD should require servicers to communicate with non-borrowing spouses at every step of the process, and HUD’s Servicing Center should provide accurate, up to date information to any non-borrowing spouse who makes an inquiry about the status of an application for the program.
  • HUD should expand the program to include non-borrowing spouses who want to remain in the home when the borrowing spouse is still living but has moved out permanently, for example due to health reasons.

For a complete list of recommendations and for more information on reverse mortgages and HUD’s programs, view NCLC’s issue brief.

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

gustafson2
In the continually evolving field of consumer bankruptcy law, a series of Supreme Court decisions shape how cases are administered nationwide. Over the coming weeks, we will highlight key decisions that every bankruptcy practitioner should recognize—both by name and by the issues they resolve. This week’s ‘memory work’ is: Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust; US v. Whiting Pools; BFP v. Resolution Trust; and Nobleman
Members
Consumer Bankruptcy Education
July 19, 2026
The linked chart is from the Bankruptcy Court in the District of Minnesota, describing Who Gives Notice Under the Bankruptcy Code and Bankruptcy Rule 2002. See www.mnb.uscourts.gov/attorney-procedures
leffler4
August 2, 2026
Consumer bankruptcy lawyers are seeing clients with solar panel debt. In Part 1, Mark Leffler provides a background for multi-district class action litigation in Minnesota and other enforcement actions by AG’s in Minnesota and Virginia concerning financing of rooftop solar panels. This, Part 2, examines legal issues underlying the fraud claims in the litigation.
Members
April 12, 2020
SMALL BUSINESS REORGANIZATION ACT POSTSCRIPT #2 Recommendation of Technical Amendment to Repair Flaw in CARES Act Attempt to Increase Small Business Eligibility under SBRA Introduction In a bulletin published March 30, the Academy announced enactment on March 27 of the "Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act" (the "CARES Act"),1 and that the Act (applying only to cases commenced on...
Members
rapoport26
December 29, 2024
From February, Prof. Rapoport looks at the question: What should happen when the Rule 2016 statement on compensation conflicts with the SOFA #16?
Members
moran_cathy
February 11, 2024
Communications Practice Pointer! Convincing clients that all of their debts must be included in bankruptcy is one of the hardest parts of being a bankruptcy lawyer. Communicating clearly with our clients, in their language, is a key part of our job. The struggle often seems Herculean.
Members
moran_cathy
March 27, 2022
I’ve been having nightmares about the 9th Circuit’s decision in Siegel for 20 years. Broad strokes, Siegel (143 F.3d 525 (9th Cir. 1998) holds that a filed claim in a no asset bankruptcy case to which no one objects is entitled to preclusive effect in subsequent litigation by . . . It looks like you are not signed in or...
Members
March 29, 2020
BULLETIN SMALL BUSINESS REORGANIZATION ACT POSTSCRIPT CARES Act Passed by Senate Increases Eligibility to Small Business Debtors with Aggregate Debts Up to $7,500,000 And Other Changes Early last Thursday morning, the Senate passed a substitute for H.R. 748, called the “Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act” (the “CARES Act”). The bill passed the House on Friday, and the President...
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
December 4, 2022
Chapter 13 plan which provided a specific amount to be cured on a reverse mortgage under § 1322(b)(5) would be controlled by the specific term of the plan provision and not by the larger proof of claim filed by the creditor. (Baer) In re Edelstein, 2022 WL 16730027 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. November 7, 2022) Case Summary The Edelsteins filed Chapter...
Members
Guerrero
While the title indicates a strictly Texas issue, this outline begins with an excellent national discussion. Something you will probably want to archive in your memory bank for future reference.
Members

Looking to Become a Member?

ConsiderChapter13.org offers a forum to advance continuing education of consumer bankruptcy via access to insightful articles, informative webinars, and the latest industry news. Join now to benefit from expert resources and stay informed.

Webinars

These informative sessions are led by industry experts and cover a range of consumer bankruptcy topics.

Member Articles

Written by industry experts, these articles provide in-depth analysis and practical guidance on consumer bankruptcy topics.

Industry News

The Academy is the go-to source for the latest news and analysis in the Chapter 13 bankruptcy industry.

To get started, please let us know which of these best fits your current position: