During those seven years, it seemed that NRMLA pursued goals more in tune with big lenders… not small independents. Example: 1) Elimination of the requirement for the borrower to sit face-to-face with either the counselor or the loan officer. This opened the floodgates for mail order, out-of-area lenders who could not provide the handholding, personal attention so many seniors require. 2) The HECM Advisor Program – with all the problems that surfaced later. 3) NRMLA’s position on cross selling, for years, seemed to support not limiting such matters by Congress. NRMLA represents only the reverse mortgage industry. I could never understand why NRMLA had any concern for the financial planning or insurance industries.

Add to the above the fact that NRMLA’s dues are extraordinarily regressive. Lenders doing less than 50 loans per year incur higher cost per closed loan than lenders closing more than 50 loans. For small lenders this cost can run between $35 and $70 per loan – depending on your volume. That is expensive for small businesses. It does not seem right that membership should be based on your business volume. NRMLA’s dues are structured now just as they were ten years ago (unless there has been a change since 2008). Perhaps at that time, with start up membership, the higher dues might have been necessary. Industry growth now, however, should make room for change.

It seems that NRMLA could better serve the reverse mortgage industry by making available quality training and reasonably priced membership to all those seeking to improve their knowledge. Dues should be more in line with other trade organizations and not be so high as to dissuade the average originator. Bring in four or five times as many members as present and, perhaps, fees would not need to be so high.

I wish NRMLA well with their CRMP program. But as for me, if I must pay $1750 dues, +/- $1000 CRMP certification, and attend expensive NRMLA conferences – I will pass on this designation.

During those seven years, it seemed that NRMLA pursued goals more in tune with big lenders… not small independents. Example: 1) Elimination of the requirement for the borrower to sit face-to-face with either the counselor or the loan officer. This opened the floodgates for mail order, out-of-area lenders who could not provide the handholding, personal attention so many seniors require. 2) The HECM Advisor Program – with all the problems that surfaced later. 3) NRMLA’s position on cross selling, for years, seemed to support not limiting such matters by Congress. NRMLA represents only the reverse mortgage industry. I could never understand why NRMLA had any concern for the financial planning or insurance industries.

Add to the above the fact that NRMLA’s dues are extraordinarily regressive. Lenders doing less than 50 loans per year incur higher cost per closed loan than lenders closing more than 50 loans. For small lenders this cost can run between $35 and $70 per loan – depending on your volume. That is expensive for small businesses. It does not seem right that membership should be based on your business volume. NRMLA’s dues are structured now just as they were ten years ago (unless there has been a change since 2008). Perhaps at that time, with start up membership, the higher dues might have been necessary. Industry growth now, however, should make room for change.

It seems that NRMLA could better serve the reverse mortgage industry by making available quality training and reasonably priced membership to all those seeking to improve their knowledge. Dues should be more in line with other trade organizations and not be so high as to dissuade the average originator. Bring in four or five times as many members as present and, perhaps, fees would not need to be so high.

I wish NRMLA well with their CRMP program. But as for me, if I must pay $1750 dues, +/- $1000 CRMP certification, and attend expensive NRMLA conferences – I will pass on this designation.

I am active in NRMLA, have pushed for the designation for several years, and by many accounts am “longer-winded.”

One reason for promoting the NRMLA credential went away earlier this year with the implementation of the SAFE licensing rules. Since early 2006 It was my hope that the exam developed by NRMLA for its designation program, would be adopted by the states as the exam for licensing reverse mortgage originators. If you are advocating that the NMLS provide a separate license for reverse mortgage origination using the NRMLA exam, I agree.

There were two other significant reasons for supporting the designation. In the middle part of this decade, I met a few convicted felons who were originating reverse mortgages; some were very, very successful. The felonies were old and had to do with drinking and drugs, not financial crimes; however, that caused some concern about other originators who might have been convicted of financial felonies against seniors. At the time there were many new originators in the industry and the quality of information provided by originators varied greatly. The designation would at least provide limited assurance that the holder was not a felon and actually had attained a qualifying level of tested knowledge.

Unfortunately because it could not be acted upon quickly enough, the NRMLA CRMP does not seem as necessary or as valuable. It still has meaning and could yet have considerable value but only if it is highly promoted by NRMLA.

To avoid receiving the title “longest winded,” I will stop here.

Please, Please, Please! We must understand that NRMLA is a Non-Profit Organization. They have had a rough year financially just as the rest of us in the Industry. The fees for Certified Reverse Mortgage Professional (CRMP) are needed to financially assist them as a Non-Profit Business. Remember – Non-Profit Organizations survive by donations! They exist on membership fees, etc.

If we want this Certification, why won’t NRMLA let us send letters to NRMLA from our Clients, Client’s Families, Estate Attorneys, Financial Planners, Senior Organizations, Legal Services, etc. and get our CRMP certification mailed to us for maybe $10.00, – OK, OK, maybe – $15.00?

The certification means nothing to the majority of seniors we assist and will continue to assist. The Relationship with our senior clients, their family and Professional Individuals is our “Certification” as the Professional in the Reverse Mortgage Industry. This relationship, not a certification, means everything to those we serve.

As others have mentioned we see many certifications flying about us, CSA, SRES, RMS, GRI, LL.M., RMP, CRS, RMC, LMFT, FC, etc., they mean nothing to the majority of our clients. We all know people with designations and no commitment to their clients.

My personal opinion, Designations are Designations only and will not provide relationship assets or fiduciary obligations to our clients. We, in the Industry, provide the attitude and professional relationship to our clients. Designations are just Designations! Some are beneficial to us and some are just Designations. The ability to build a relationship is primary. Without this ability, your future in the reverse mortgage industry and others are limited.

By the way, the code of ethics set by the companies we work for and contract with may exceed NRMLA’s Code of Ethics. Violating a code of ethics does not mean a Law was violated. Violating a Law violates all codes of ethics.

I have heard from members of the original groups which considered this designation that there were serious discussions about lots of education requirements outside the meetings for NRMLA conventions and regional meetings. It really sounded interesting in those days. Then along came the ICC and the education requirements flew right out ye olde window.

I wonder if the larger lenders thought that they would have to pay for some or all of the CRMP and overruled the original groups including Peter Bell. The way I heard it, Peter Bell wanted a high quality designation. Well, members of the ICC — this AIN'T it.