Maybe on 1/1 you can let us all know who your good authority is, Good luck in your new career. What is it?

For those who advocate still lower net principal limits for seniors, they will love the MBA bill. For those who believe in legislation for legislation sake, the MBA bill will bring satisfaction. It is not the idea of the MBA creating such a bill that is bothering; it is the bill itself.

As Admin can attest to, it is surprising while doing research on the bill, how little some who were highly involved in its creation knew about specific contents; yet as a model bill it is relatively short. An article analyzing the section of the bill in question will be submitted to Admin in the next few weeks. The MBA has already submitted the bill to all of the states’ legislative branches. As an officer of a lender which is a firm member of the MBA it is difficult to find fault with the actions of the MBA, but the state model bill as originally advocated to the states is something that needs to be withdrawn and rewritten. There is already some significant action being taken to have the bill rewritten.

A state reverse mortgage model bill needs to be created. However, the MBA state model bill should be withdrawn and a new attempt with a new strategy made to create one.

A new state model bill should be written in consultation with a consortium of representatives from among state lawmakers, their legislative staffs, legal consultants who write state bills, state regulators who will oversee the administration of such bills, reverse mortgage lenders, their legal staffs, trade associations, recognized elder advocates, and other parties who legitimately should be included. This is the way that state model bills have been successfully written and implemented in the past and is very close to the manner in which the California proposed legislation went from an overzealous devastating measure into a framework from which to provide reasonable protections to seniors. The MBA state model bill was written solely by industry experts.