[vimeo id=”149925832″ width=”625″ height=”352″]
Looking back at the top stories of 2015
With the year’s end quickly approaching we have compiled a few short clips of the top industry-changing stories presented in the Industry Leader Update in 2015. Enjoy and have a safe and happy holiday season!
Looking for more reverse mortgage news, commentary and technology? Visit ReverseFocus.com today.
1 Comment
Two points were actually one; HUD concedes on NBSs’ rights to not be displaced as required under the law. If NBSs’ rights would harm the MMI Fund as HUD articulated in the court case it lost, how is it that the PROGRAM is better off now with Mortgagee Letters (MLs) 2014-07, 2015-02 and 2015-15?
The only group better off by the MLs is a small group of the NBSs that the law intended to benefit. The law does not distinquish between qualified and disqualified (that is HUD’s made up rule). If the PROGRAM is better off by allowing qualified NBSs to not be displaced why not all NBSs who hold title. Also why is the benefit limited to surviving NBSs? It should be available in all NBS displacement situations where title is held by the still living borrowing spouse or the surviving NBS.
By the terms of the 2013 Reverse Mortgage Stabilization Act (RMSA) HUD has properly modified the PROGRAM for NBSs for all HECMs with Case Numbers assigned after 8/3/2014; the same cannot be said for ML 2015-15. The RMSA did not give HUD the right to retroactively change law. The courts will no doubt have to deal with this IF such a case reaches the courts. Of course there is as of yet no proposed compensation for those that HUD harmed under its prior policy.