Congress Passes Extension of Higher Reverse Mortgage Loan Limits

Late last night, the House and Senate passed an extension of the $625,500 loan limit for reverse mortgages through December 31, 2010.  Loan limits for the Home Equity Conversion Mortgage (HECM) would’ve returned to $417,000 at the end of the year if the extension wasn’t passed.

Also included in the continuing resolution (H.R. 2996), was an extension of the GSE loan limit of $729,750 through the end of 2010.

“Given the lack of a private secondary mortgage market, FHA, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are pretty much the only game in town,” said Robert Story, Chairman of the Mortgage Bankers Association.

Advertisement

“Extending the current loan limits through 2010 will allow more loans to qualify for these important programs and will help keep mortgage credit more accessible and affordable for qualified borrowers.”

The President is expected to sign the continuing resolution soon.

Technorati Tags: ,,,,,

Join the Conversation (39)

see all

This is a professional community. Please use discretion when posting a comment.

  • Mr. Veale – Thank you for taking the time to clarify the process for me; I obviously misunderstood it!nnBTW, while I “subscribe” to email replies to my posts, I’ve never received one. I just happened to find the “Replies” section in my Profile today and found several of your (typically) thoughtful responses – first time I’ve seen them! Thanks again.

  • jamesnelson: Try some tact and courtesy for a change and maybe your opinions will carry more weight. No more baloney about anonymity and accusing people of lying. Yes, I am a senior (71), and try to act like one, most of the time (not this time though).

  • Like I said before: BALONEY. I stand behind EVERYTHING I have written and WHAT’S MORE–I have the good sense, common courtesy, and intellectual courage to sign my actual name, unlike you, Critic. And furthermore, if you are really a Senior, YOU ought to be ashamed of your self for hiding behing an alias.

  • Mr. Nelson,rnrnI have no idea why you persist in attacking Mr. Bell and the NRMLA staff. This kind of activity only draws negative attention to a truly hard working and caring individual — you. NRMLA is what it is. It is a lenders organization and tries to promote the industry as well as it can. rnrnWhile it is all right to call what I write baloney, please do not apply that same principle to an individual who is a recognized leader in our industry like Mr. Bell. That really reflects badly on you. I am sure many others call what I write baloney and have said it before. Who am I?rnrnYou are a senior like me. We are both full grown men. Just understand, what you write has consequences; so please be careful what you write.rn

  • Baloney: What you are asking me to accept is NRMLA should only be concered about the Forest; what happens to an individual Tree is immaterial to them. And, Peter Bell and his Band of Lobbying Luminaries are abovernthe fray at the grass roots level. Nonsense. How much time and effort (and money) does it take one (even a subordinate) to pick up the telephone and contact key people at a particular NRMLA Member to inquire about help with resolving the issue? What is missing is the will to help an individual Senior, in my opinion.

  • Mr. Nelson,rnrnIt is good to see you are actively involved once more.rnrnWhile no one needs to defend Mr. Bell, sometimes people seem to think NRMLA is a senior advocate group but that simply is not the case. NRMLA is our industry trade association. It rigorously promotes the concerns of the reverse mortgage industry and defends our interests. Some promote the idea that along with its industry responsibilities, it also has responsibility for representing seniors in almost every way imaginable.rnrnYou bring up a good point. Here is a reverse mortgage lender doing something that appears inconsistent with that mission. Nationally chartered banks are complex entities. I very much doubt if the mortgage was owned by Bank of America; however, it probably is the servicing entity. As the servicing entity, there is little Bank of America can do other than following the stipulations its agreement as the servicer requires of it. rnrnIt seems since the loan in question is a forward mortgage the right organization to be handling this issue is the MBA. NRMLA cannot right every wrong in the mortgage industry impacting seniors or even for seniors who want to replace their forward mortgage with a reverse. If it did, no monies would be left to provide the services that only NRMLA does. We are a dinky industry and the trade association has a very limited budget. rn

  • REVGUYJIM,rnrnWhere are you coming up with the idea that cash payments for claims on loans terminating during the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010 will exceed premiums collected? The $798 million positive credit subsidy has absolutely nothing to do with expected payouts over premuim collections for any fiscal year, period.rnrnThe postive credit subsidy is a projection of the outflow of cash to pay for claims over the premiums collected on the projected HECMs to be endorsed in the current fiscal year. It is only this cohort of HECMs that are involved. The first time this will happen will not be until some time in the future, if ever.rnrnIn other words, if 150,000 HECMs will be endorsed this fiscal year, it is only these HECMs that are being looked at. It is these HECMs and only these HECMs that the Administration is estimating will cost US taxpayers $798 million.rnrnBy reducing the PLFs on the HECMs to be endorsed in this fiscal year by 10%, HUD is saying that there will be no need for a positive credit subsidy on the HECMs endorsed during the current fiscal year. I hope that explains what is going on.

  • Hot damn Peter Bell is all over this site when it comes to making sure Folks know of his good work. And that’s alright–nothing like wacking your self on the back when your group does what it is PAID to do. Last week there were blogs about Bank of America alegedly refusing to modify an older Senior’srnconventional mortgage. If what was reported were true, the action (inaction, really) on the part of Bank of America was egregious. I suggested Peter Bell and his group get involved to help the Senior out. I’m curious if he did; perhaps once again Peter Bell can enlighten us about his good work.

  • Peter:rnrnThank you, and the NRMLA legislative team, for getting this critical item added to the CR! rnrnThis will certainly make the upcoming annual conference in San Diego a lot more pleasant.rnrnRegards,rnJohn

  • I do not understand how reducing the PLFs on loans made this year addresses the negative subsidy created by claims for loans terminating exceeding premiums collected this year. What am I missing?

  • Mr. Bell,rnrnIt is hard to believe, once scored…. rnrnThat is great news. Although unlikely, here’s hoping that Congress will find some way to authorize the subsidy and allow HUD to reverse the 10% reduction. I guess no matter how unlikely, we can always hope.rnrnAgain thanks for the explanation..

  • The need for the $798 million in credit subsidy for HECM was eliminated by HUD’s action in reducing the PLFs. With lower PLFs, the program is scored to be revenue neutral.

  • Mr. Bell,rnrnWill the extension impact the $798 million positive credit subsidy? Or was it already reflected in the HUD reduction to the principal limit factors?rnrnThanks.

  • Mr. Bell,rnrnIt seems it is always the few that take care of the many. It is hard to believe how many complain about dues and conference costs. We need a voice in DC and NRMLA provides it.rnrnI hate to talk about those who want a free ride but….rn

  • For the record, let me state that as of late Tuesday afternoon this past week, as the Continuing Resolution conference report was being prepared to go to the House floor, the HECM loan limit was omitted. NRMLA’s legislative team swung into action and made sure it was added in.rnrnIn fact, when NRMA’s leadership met with FHA Commissioner Stevens and his staff the next day, he remarked that somehow extending the HECM limits thru 2010 was inserted into the CR at the last minute.rnrn”How do you think it got there?” I was chuckling to myself as the Commissioner made this comment.rnrnMy sincere thanks to our Congressional relations team, Melody Fennel and David Horne, for their quick and effective response on this matter.

  • Please Mr. President?rnrnOur seniors have suffered enough. PLF reductions and housing values are bad enough. This will help many seniors in higher valued homes escape from adjustable rate mortgages where possible.rnrnThis is good news.

  • Please Mr. President?

    Our seniors have suffered enough. PLF reductions and housing values are bad enough. This will help many seniors in higher valued homes escape from adjustable rate mortgages where possible.

    This is good news.

  • For the record, let me state that as of late Tuesday afternoon this past week, as the Continuing Resolution conference report was being prepared to go to the House floor, the HECM loan limit was omitted. NRMLA's legislative team swung into action and made sure it was added in.

    In fact, when NRMA's leadership met with FHA Commissioner Stevens and his staff the next day, he remarked that somehow extending the HECM limits thru 2010 was inserted into the CR at the last minute.

    “How do you think it got there?” I was chuckling to myself as the Commissioner made this comment.

    My sincere thanks to our Congressional relations team, Melody Fennel and David Horne, for their quick and effective response on this matter.

    • Mr. Bell,

      It seems it is always the few that take care of the many. It is hard to believe how many complain about dues and conference costs. We need a voice in DC and NRMLA provides it.

      I hate to talk about those who want a free ride but….

    • Mr. Bell,

      Will the extension impact the $798 million positive credit subsidy? Or was it already reflected in the HUD reduction to the principal limit factors?

      Thanks.

  • Mr. Bell,

    It is hard to believe, once scored….

    That is great news. Although unlikely, here's hoping that Congress will find some way to authorize the subsidy and allow HUD to reverse the 10% reduction. I guess no matter how unlikely, we can always hope.

    Again thanks for the explanation..

  • I do not understand how reducing the PLFs on loans made this year addresses the negative subsidy created by claims for loans terminating exceeding premiums collected this year. What am I missing?

    • REVGUYJIM,

      Where are you coming up with the idea that cash payments for claims on loans terminating during the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010 will exceed premiums collected? The $798 million positive credit subsidy has absolutely nothing to do with expected payouts over premuim collections for any fiscal year, period.

      The postive credit subsidy is a projection of the outflow of cash to pay for claims over the premiums collected on the projected HECMs to be endorsed in the current fiscal year. It is only this cohort of HECMs that are involved. The first time this will happen will not be until some time in the future, if ever.

      In other words, if 150,000 HECMs will be endorsed this fiscal year, it is only these HECMs that are being looked at. It is these HECMs and only these HECMs that the Administration is estimating will cost US taxpayers $798 million.

      By reducing the PLFs on the HECMs to be endorsed in this fiscal year by 10%, HUD is saying that there will be no need for a positive credit subsidy on the HECMs endorsed during the current fiscal year. I hope that explains what is going on.

      • Mr. Veale – Thank you for taking the time to clarify the process for me; I obviously misunderstood it!

        BTW, while I “subscribe” to email replies to my posts, I've never received one. I just happened to find the “Replies” section in my Profile today and found several of your (typically) thoughtful responses – first time I've seen them! Thanks again.

  • Hot damn Peter Bell is all over this site when it comes to making sure Folks know of his good work. And that's alright–nothing like wacking your self on the back when your group does what it is PAID to do. Last week there were blogs about Bank of America alegedly refusing to modify an older Senior's
    conventional mortgage. If what was reported were true, the action (inaction, really) on the part of Bank of America was egregious. I suggested Peter Bell and his group get involved to help the Senior out. I'm curious if he did; perhaps once again Peter Bell can enlighten us about his good work.

  • Mr. Nelson,

    It is good to see you are actively involved once more.

    While no one needs to defend Mr. Bell, sometimes people seem to think NRMLA is a senior advocate group but that simply is not the case. NRMLA is our industry trade association. It rigorously promotes the concerns of the reverse mortgage industry and defends our interests. Some promote the idea that along with its industry responsibilities, it also has responsibility for representing seniors in almost every way imaginable.

    You bring up a good point. Here is a reverse mortgage lender doing something that appears inconsistent with that mission. Nationally chartered banks are complex entities. I very much doubt if the mortgage was owned by Bank of America; however, it probably is the servicing entity. As the servicing entity, there is little Bank of America can do other than following the stipulations its agreement as the servicer requires of it.

    It seems since the loan in question is a forward mortgage the right organization to be handling this issue is the MBA. NRMLA cannot right every wrong in the mortgage industry impacting seniors or even for seniors who want to replace their forward mortgage with a reverse. If it did, no monies would be left to provide the services that only NRMLA does. We are a dinky industry and the trade association has a very limited budget.

  • Baloney: What you are asking me to accept is NRMLA should only be concered about the Forest; what happens to an individual Tree is immaterial to them. And, Peter Bell and his Band of Lobbying Luminaries are above
    the fray at the grass roots level. Nonsense. How much time and effort (and money) does it take one (even a subordinate) to pick up the telephone and contact key people at a particular NRMLA Member to inquire about help with resolving the issue? What is missing is the will to help an individual Senior, in my opinion.

  • Mr. Nelson,

    I have no idea why you persist in attacking Mr. Bell and the NRMLA staff. This kind of activity only draws negative attention to a truly hard working and caring individual — you. NRMLA is what it is. It is a lenders organization and tries to promote the industry as well as it can.

    While it is all right to call what I write baloney, please do not apply that same principle to an individual who is a recognized leader in our industry like Mr. Bell. That really reflects badly on you. I am sure many others call what I write baloney and have said it before. Who am I?

    You are a senior like me. We are both full grown men. Just understand, what you write has consequences; so please be careful what you write.

  • Like I said before: BALONEY. I stand behind EVERYTHING I have written and WHAT'S MORE–I have the good sense, common courtesy, and intellectual courage to sign my actual name, unlike you, Critic. And furthermore, if you are really a Senior, YOU ought to be ashamed of your self for hiding behing an alias.

  • jamesnelson: Try some tact and courtesy for a change and maybe your opinions will carry more weight. No more baloney about anonymity and accusing people of lying. Yes, I am a senior (71), and try to act like one, most of the time (not this time though).

  • Mr. Veale – Thank you for taking the time to clarify the process for me; I obviously misunderstood it!nnBTW, while I “subscribe” to email replies to my posts, I’ve never received one. I just happened to find the “Replies” section in my Profile today and found several of your (typically) thoughtful responses – first time I’ve seen them! Thanks again.

string(109) "https://reversemortgagedaily.com/2009/10/30/congress-passes-extension-of-higher-reverse-mortgage-loan-limits/"

Share your opinion

[wpli_login_link redirect="https://reversemortgagedaily.com/2009/10/30/congress-passes-extension-of-higher-reverse-mortgage-loan-limits/"]