Stretching words? AARP Lawsuit

[vimeo id=”24970406″ width=”601″ height=”338″]

How far will the AARP lawsuit stretch the definition of homeowner? Watch the video for Reverse Mortgage News and Commentary regarding the AARP lawsuit.

Editor in Chief: HECMWorld.com

As a prominent commentator and Editor in Chief at HECMWorld.com, Shannon Hicks has played a pivotal role in reshaping the conversation around reverse mortgages. His unique perspectives and deep understanding of the industry have not only educated countless readers but has also contributed to introducing practical strategies utilizing housing wealth with a reverse mortgage.

Shannon’s journey into the world of reverse mortgages began in 2002 as an originator and his prior work in the financial services industry. Shannon has been covering reverse mortgage news stories since 2008 when he launched the podcast HECMWorld Weekly. Later, in 2010 he began producing the weekly video series The Industry Leader Update and Friday’s Food for Thought.

Readers wishing to submit stories or interview requests can reach our team at: info@hecmworld.com.

1 Comment

James E. Veale, CPA, MBT
June 13, 2011 at 12:38 pm
The participants in the AARP have had some interesting comments of late. I would remind counsel for the plaintiffs that HUD has defined homeowner for this purpose. They have consistently defined it as a borrowing spouse only. What would redefining it do?

Now counsel for the AARP plaintiffs is telling us that HUD can define the term spouse to exclude spouses who become spouses after the HECM goes into place? What would they do with spouses who were married to the borrower at time of closing, divorced, and then remarried before the demise of the borrowing spouse? Would that spouse qualify? It seems AARP and its counsel are looking to become the ultimate deciders of law pertaining to HECMs or if not all HECM law at least the spouse displacement rule.

Who is AARP or its counsel to declare what HUD can or cannot do? Hubris in this case is running at all time highs. While they have every right to litigate over the actions HUD takes, they have no power whatsoever to dictate to HUD what HUD can or can not do.

Is AARP counsel pushing this definition so they can litigate on behalf of spouses who were not married to the borrowing spouse at time of closing as is the case with one of their current plaintiffs? If misstated or taken out of context, counsel should make sure it is corrected or retracted. The comments of the participants in this case are getting a little out of hand.
- Reply
- Link