I admit it I forget things. Thinks like "do I have a can of Linseed Oil or do I need one ?" I use it to oil handles of garden tools and other wood things that should not get left out in the weather but some times do.
I recently discovered three cans on the shelf in our paint room. What to do with the extra cans ? If you live in Clintonville and you are member of the Clintonville-Beechwold Freecyclers you post a message to the (members only) Facebook Group.
Some one will respond "Hey I need some of that !" You exchange emails off line with address etc., put the material on your front porch and it's picked up.
Now i'm off to pick up my new window screen installation tool that some generous soul has put out on their porch.
Call it redistribution - call it neighborliness. It works !
I admit it I forget things. Thinks like "do I have a can of Linseed Oil or do I need one ?" I use it to oil handles of garden tools and other wood things that should not get left out in the weather but some times do.
I recently discovered three cans on the shelf in our paint room. What to do with the extra cans ? If you live in Clintonville and you are member of the Clintonville-Beechwold Freecyclers you post a message to the (members only) Facebook Group.
Some one will respond "Hey I need some of that !" You exchange emails off line with address etc., put the material on your front porch and it's picked up.
Now i'm off to pick up my new window screen installation tool that some generous soul has put out on their porch.
Call it redistribution - call it neighborliness. It works !
The only solace for Isabel Santos as she spends her evenings huddled over stacks of yellowed foreclosure notices is that her parents are not alive to watch their ranch-style house in Pleasant Hill, Calif., slipping away.
Ms. Santos, 61, along with a growing number of baby boomers, is confronting a bitter inheritance: The same loans that were supposed to help their elderly parents stay in their houses are now pushing their children out. “My dad had nothing when he came here from Cuba and worked so hard to buy this house,” Ms. Santos said, her voice quivering.
Similar scenes are being played out throughout an aging America, where the children of elderly borrowers are learning that their parents’ reverse mortgages are now threatening their own inheritances. Reverse mortgages, which allow homeowners 62 and older to borrow money against the value of their homes that need not be paid back until they move out or die, have long posed pitfalls for older borrowers.
Now many like Ms. Santos are discovering that reverse mortgages can also come up with a harsh sting for their heirs.
Under federal rules, survivors are supposed to be offered the option to settle the loan for a percentage of the full amount. Instead, reverse mortgage companies are increasingly threatening to foreclose unless heirs pay the mortgages in full, according to interviews with more than four dozen housing counselors, state regulators and 25 families whose elderly parents took out reverse mortgages.
Some lenders are moving to foreclose just weeks after the borrower dies, many families say. The complaints are echoed by borrowers across the country, according to a review of federal and state court lawsuits against reverse mortgage lenders.
Others say that they don’t get that far. Soon after their parents die, the heirs say they are plunged into a bureaucratic maze as they try to get lenders to provide them with details about how to keep their family homes.
Ms. Santos’s mother, Yolanda, began borrowing money against the equity in her home in 2009, when she was in her 80s. Ms. Santos thought the arrangement would defray her mother’s living and medical expenses by providing cash up front.
It was only after her mother died two years later with an outstanding reverse mortgage balance of about $308,000, that Ms. Santos learned the loan had in fact jeopardized her parents’ nest egg. The financial company that extended the loan, Reverse Mortgage Solutions, moved to foreclose unless she paid the full balance of the mortgage.
What Ms. Santos did not know at first was that surviving family members were supposed to be offered the choice to settle the reverse mortgage for a percentage of the full amount. In her case, that lesser amount offered to heirs is 95 percent of the home’s current value, or about $237,000, according to one estimate. Any shortfall if the home sells for less than the debt is covered by a federal insurance fund, which all reverse mortgage borrowers are required to pay into each month.
After being contacted by The New York Times, the lender offered Ms. Santos the option to buy the home for 95 percent of the current value. The only problem is that the home is now worth more than it was three years ago when Ms. Santos’s mother died.
Lora Bitting, 61, said she was crippled by sadness after her father, Jesse, who took out a reverse mortgage on his Muskogee, Okla., home, died in December. Still, Ms. Bitting contacted the lender a month later to begin the process of paying off the $194,254.34 debt, according to a copy of the letter reviewed by The Times.
But because of delays in uploading her letter and a missing trust document, the lender ultimately sped up foreclosure proceedings on her father’s home last month.
There is no data on how many heirs are facing foreclosure because of reverse mortgages. But interviews withelder careadvocates, the housing counselors and heirs, suggest that it is a growing problem already affecting an estimated tens of thousands of people. And it is one that threatens to ensnare future generations, as older Americans increasingly turn to their homes for cash. Already, the combined debt of Americans from the ages of 65 to 74 is rising faster than that of any other age group, according to the Federal Reserve. And approximately 13 percent of the reverse mortgages outstanding are underwater, according to an estimate from New View Advisors, a New York consulting firm.
“It’s truly one of the thorniest issues I hear about from a growing number of attorneys,” said Diane E. Thompson, a lawyer at the National Consumer Law Center.
Reverse mortgage lenders say that they abide by federal rules, noting that their goal is to avert foreclosures, which can be costly and time-consuming. And used correctly, reverse mortgages can help older homeowners get cash to pay for retirement. Peter H. Bell, president and chief executive of the National Reverse Mortgage Lenders Association, a trade group, notes that the loans are tightly regulated.
The reverse mortgage market has been in decline since the financial crisis. The number of such loans fell to 51,000 in 2012 from a peak of about 115,000 in 2007. At the same time, the rate of default on reverse mortgages rose to approximately 9.4 percent of loans in 2012, up from 2 percent a decade earlier, according to theConsumer Financial Protection Bureau. As the market foundered, large banks left, replaced by a fleet of smaller lenders and brokers.
For heirs, the problem with reverse mortgages often centers on the little-known set of federal regulations administered by theDepartment of Housing and Urban Development. A spokesman for the agency said it vets participating reverse mortgage firms to spot any possible violations, but did not provide a tally of the participating firms found in violation or of the participating firms that have been penalized. The regulations apply to reverse mortgages that are insured by theFederal Housing Administration, virtually all of the market.
Lenders must offer heirs up to 30 days from when the loan becomes due to determine what they want to do with the property, and up to six months to arrange financing. Most important, housing counselors say, is a rule that allows heirs to pay 95 percent of the current fair market value of the property — a price that is determined by an appraiser hired by the lenders. Mr. Bell of the National Reverse Mortgage Lenders Association said that lenders are strictly abiding by the 95 percent rule.
The difference offered by the 95 percent rule can be critical. After the financial crisis, when housing prices tumbled, the disparity between the current value of the home and the total balance on the mortgage often means the difference between keeping a home and losing it to foreclosure.
When Robert Campbell’s mother, Lillie, died in 2012, the outstanding loan balance was $123,773 — a sum that was impossible for him to pay. But, he could have cobbled together the $14,000, or 95 percent of the market value of the Chicago home when Ms. Campbell died. The only problem is that the lender never informed him of that option, according to his lawyer, Kathryn Liss. It wasn’t until Mr. Campbell contacted the lawyer that he learned of an alternative. There are others like him.
“There are hundreds of families who want to keep their homes and are simply not aware of their rights,” Jean Constantine-Davis, a senior lawyer forAARP, said.
A version of this article appears in print on 03/27/2014, on page B1 of the NewYork edition with the headline: Inheriting a Mortgage Pain.
The only solace for Isabel Santos as she spends her evenings huddled over stacks of yellowed foreclosure notices is that her parents are not alive to watch their ranch-style house in Pleasant Hill, Calif., slipping away.
Ms. Santos, 61, along with a growing number of baby boomers, is confronting a bitter inheritance: The same loans that were supposed to help their elderly parents stay in their houses are now pushing their children out. “My dad had nothing when he came here from Cuba and worked so hard to buy this house,” Ms. Santos said, her voice quivering.
Similar scenes are being played out throughout an aging America, where the children of elderly borrowers are learning that their parents’ reverse mortgages are now threatening their own inheritances. Reverse mortgages, which allow homeowners 62 and older to borrow money against the value of their homes that need not be paid back until they move out or die, have long posed pitfalls for older borrowers.
Now many like Ms. Santos are discovering that reverse mortgages can also come up with a harsh sting for their heirs.
Under federal rules, survivors are supposed to be offered the option to settle the loan for a percentage of the full amount. Instead, reverse mortgage companies are increasingly threatening to foreclose unless heirs pay the mortgages in full, according to interviews with more than four dozen housing counselors, state regulators and 25 families whose elderly parents took out reverse mortgages.
Some lenders are moving to foreclose just weeks after the borrower dies, many families say. The complaints are echoed by borrowers across the country, according to a review of federal and state court lawsuits against reverse mortgage lenders.
Others say that they don’t get that far. Soon after their parents die, the heirs say they are plunged into a bureaucratic maze as they try to get lenders to provide them with details about how to keep their family homes.
Ms. Santos’s mother, Yolanda, began borrowing money against the equity in her home in 2009, when she was in her 80s. Ms. Santos thought the arrangement would defray her mother’s living and medical expenses by providing cash up front.
It was only after her mother died two years later with an outstanding reverse mortgage balance of about $308,000, that Ms. Santos learned the loan had in fact jeopardized her parents’ nest egg. The financial company that extended the loan, Reverse Mortgage Solutions, moved to foreclose unless she paid the full balance of the mortgage.
What Ms. Santos did not know at first was that surviving family members were supposed to be offered the choice to settle the reverse mortgage for a percentage of the full amount. In her case, that lesser amount offered to heirs is 95 percent of the home’s current value, or about $237,000, according to one estimate. Any shortfall if the home sells for less than the debt is covered by a federal insurance fund, which all reverse mortgage borrowers are required to pay into each month.
After being contacted by The New York Times, the lender offered Ms. Santos the option to buy the home for 95 percent of the current value. The only problem is that the home is now worth more than it was three years ago when Ms. Santos’s mother died.
Lora Bitting, 61, said she was crippled by sadness after her father, Jesse, who took out a reverse mortgage on his Muskogee, Okla., home, died in December. Still, Ms. Bitting contacted the lender a month later to begin the process of paying off the $194,254.34 debt, according to a copy of the letter reviewed by The Times.
But because of delays in uploading her letter and a missing trust document, the lender ultimately sped up foreclosure proceedings on her father’s home last month.
There is no data on how many heirs are facing foreclosure because of reverse mortgages. But interviews withelder careadvocates, the housing counselors and heirs, suggest that it is a growing problem already affecting an estimated tens of thousands of people. And it is one that threatens to ensnare future generations, as older Americans increasingly turn to their homes for cash. Already, the combined debt of Americans from the ages of 65 to 74 is rising faster than that of any other age group, according to the Federal Reserve. And approximately 13 percent of the reverse mortgages outstanding are underwater, according to an estimate from New View Advisors, a New York consulting firm.
“It’s truly one of the thorniest issues I hear about from a growing number of attorneys,” said Diane E. Thompson, a lawyer at the National Consumer Law Center.
Reverse mortgage lenders say that they abide by federal rules, noting that their goal is to avert foreclosures, which can be costly and time-consuming. And used correctly, reverse mortgages can help older homeowners get cash to pay for retirement. Peter H. Bell, president and chief executive of the National Reverse Mortgage Lenders Association, a trade group, notes that the loans are tightly regulated.
The reverse mortgage market has been in decline since the financial crisis. The number of such loans fell to 51,000 in 2012 from a peak of about 115,000 in 2007. At the same time, the rate of default on reverse mortgages rose to approximately 9.4 percent of loans in 2012, up from 2 percent a decade earlier, according to theConsumer Financial Protection Bureau. As the market foundered, large banks left, replaced by a fleet of smaller lenders and brokers.
For heirs, the problem with reverse mortgages often centers on the little-known set of federal regulations administered by theDepartment of Housing and Urban Development. A spokesman for the agency said it vets participating reverse mortgage firms to spot any possible violations, but did not provide a tally of the participating firms found in violation or of the participating firms that have been penalized. The regulations apply to reverse mortgages that are insured by theFederal Housing Administration, virtually all of the market.
Lenders must offer heirs up to 30 days from when the loan becomes due to determine what they want to do with the property, and up to six months to arrange financing. Most important, housing counselors say, is a rule that allows heirs to pay 95 percent of the current fair market value of the property — a price that is determined by an appraiser hired by the lenders. Mr. Bell of the National Reverse Mortgage Lenders Association said that lenders are strictly abiding by the 95 percent rule.
The difference offered by the 95 percent rule can be critical. After the financial crisis, when housing prices tumbled, the disparity between the current value of the home and the total balance on the mortgage often means the difference between keeping a home and losing it to foreclosure.
When Robert Campbell’s mother, Lillie, died in 2012, the outstanding loan balance was $123,773 — a sum that was impossible for him to pay. But, he could have cobbled together the $14,000, or 95 percent of the market value of the Chicago home when Ms. Campbell died. The only problem is that the lender never informed him of that option, according to his lawyer, Kathryn Liss. It wasn’t until Mr. Campbell contacted the lawyer that he learned of an alternative. There are others like him.
“There are hundreds of families who want to keep their homes and are simply not aware of their rights,” Jean Constantine-Davis, a senior lawyer forAARP, said.
A version of this article appears in print on 03/27/2014, on page B1 of the NewYork edition with the headline: Inheriting a Mortgage Pain.
Columbus Mayor Michael B. Coleman and City Council President Andrew J. Ginther today announced the creation of a Charter Review Commission. The panel of highly regarded civic leaders has been charged with reviewing the Columbus City Charter and making recommendations for potential revisions.
“The City Charter serves as the constitution for Columbus,” said Mayor Coleman. “It is in the best interest of all residents for the Charter Review Commissionto study the operation of city government and help find ways to improve our service to the community.”
The Charter Review Commission will be co-chaired by State Representative Michael F. Curtin and Columbus attorney Marchelle E. Moore, vice president of legal and government affairs and general counsel for the Central Ohio Transit Authority. The Commission also includes Jeff Cabot, executive director of Kids Voting Central Ohio; Dawn Tyler Lee, senior vice president of Community Impact for United Way of Central Ohio; and Columbus City Auditor Hugh J. Dorrian.
“I’m grateful to our co-chairs for volunteering their time and expertise to lead the Charter Review Commission,” said Council President Ginther. “They and their fellow commission members are undertaking important work that will have a positive impact on city government for years to come.”
The Charter review will be comprehensive and open to the public, culminating in recommendations to the mayor and council that may include specific amendment language; suggestions to improve, clarify or modernize the Charter; or recommendations to further research sections that require additional consideration or deliberation. Any recommendations made by the Charter Review Commission to amend the Charter will require a vote of council and the approval of Columbus voters.
“I am honored to serve on the Charter Review Commission, as I currently serve in a similar capacity in the Ohio General Assembly through my work on the Ohio Constitutional Modernization Commission,” said Co-chair Michael Curtin. “It is important that we periodically assess our systems of government to ensure that they are serving the public effectively.”
The Columbus City Charter, originally adopted by voters in 1914, outlines the fundamental rights, powers and responsibilities of the citizens and their elected municipal officials. The Columbus City Charter was last amended in 2010, 1999 and 1998. In each of these instances, revisions to the Charter were limited to specific sections.
“Our Charter should be a living document, evolving with the needs and expectations of the citizenry it serves,” said Co-chair Marchelle Moore. “The Commission will develop recommendations that will help ensure that this 100-year-old document meets the needs of our modern, vibrant city.”
The Charter Review Commission expects to begin holding public meetings in April and to continue to meet through the spring and into the summer. There is no specific deadline for recommendations to the Mayor and Council. Meetings will be recorded for rebroadcast by CTV, Columbus’ government television channel on local cable systems.
Columbus Mayor Michael B. Coleman and City Council President Andrew J. Ginther today announced the creation of a Charter Review Commission. The panel of highly regarded civic leaders has been charged with reviewing the Columbus City Charter and making recommendations for potential revisions.
“The City Charter serves as the constitution for Columbus,” said Mayor Coleman. “It is in the best interest of all residents for the Charter Review Commissionto study the operation of city government and help find ways to improve our service to the community.”
The Charter Review Commission will be co-chaired by State Representative Michael F. Curtin and Columbus attorney Marchelle E. Moore, vice president of legal and government affairs and general counsel for the Central Ohio Transit Authority. The Commission also includes Jeff Cabot, executive director of Kids Voting Central Ohio; Dawn Tyler Lee, senior vice president of Community Impact for United Way of Central Ohio; and Columbus City Auditor Hugh J. Dorrian.
“I’m grateful to our co-chairs for volunteering their time and expertise to lead the Charter Review Commission,” said Council President Ginther. “They and their fellow commission members are undertaking important work that will have a positive impact on city government for years to come.”
The Charter review will be comprehensive and open to the public, culminating in recommendations to the mayor and council that may include specific amendment language; suggestions to improve, clarify or modernize the Charter; or recommendations to further research sections that require additional consideration or deliberation. Any recommendations made by the Charter Review Commission to amend the Charter will require a vote of council and the approval of Columbus voters.
“I am honored to serve on the Charter Review Commission, as I currently serve in a similar capacity in the Ohio General Assembly through my work on the Ohio Constitutional Modernization Commission,” said Co-chair Michael Curtin. “It is important that we periodically assess our systems of government to ensure that they are serving the public effectively.”
The Columbus City Charter, originally adopted by voters in 1914, outlines the fundamental rights, powers and responsibilities of the citizens and their elected municipal officials. The Columbus City Charter was last amended in 2010, 1999 and 1998. In each of these instances, revisions to the Charter were limited to specific sections.
“Our Charter should be a living document, evolving with the needs and expectations of the citizenry it serves,” said Co-chair Marchelle Moore. “The Commission will develop recommendations that will help ensure that this 100-year-old document meets the needs of our modern, vibrant city.”
The Charter Review Commission expects to begin holding public meetings in April and to continue to meet through the spring and into the summer. There is no specific deadline for recommendations to the Mayor and Council. Meetings will be recorded for rebroadcast by CTV, Columbus’ government television channel on local cable systems.
