Legal counsel for the plan and I met with the in-house legal staff, tax department, and payroll staff of the company. The difficult questions were easily addressed in this group of highly talented, trained, and educated individuals. Then while discussing participant payroll issues I made the comment that caused the room to break out in laughter. I stated that other than the IRS and state taxing agencies we could obviously skip any discussion on garnishments since there were most likely none. It was then I learned that even the wealthiest working Americans have significant past due bills to Sears, Penney’s, and other retailers. To say I was surprised is greatly understating my reaction.

So now I would have been surprised not to see immediate needs reflected by the relatively more affluent. Of course what types of debts are believed to be immediate by this group are not the same ones that bother most of us. This is why we, as originators, need to listen when we meet with seniors. Too many times their values (as Sarah Hulbert outlines in part in her article in the June 2009 issue of Reverse Review) are not exactly the same as our own. If we are going to help seniors we, originators, need to listen carefully to what seniors are really telling us. It is only then we will be able to help senior homeowners solve their financial needs — just like so many of us strive to do each time we meet with seniors.

With respect to the Figure 4 chart included above, I thought the most surprising thing was the relationship of 'immediate needs' customers to their net worth. Exactly opposite what I would have expected (chart suggests that higher net worth households are more likely to consider immediate needs a driver for RM).