Skip to main content

Reverse mortgage can pump up your retirement pay

"QUESTION: My husband and I are retired with a total annual income of $40,000. We owe $145,000 on our home, which is worth $475,000. We don't have any extra to play with. We would like to know whether you would advise us to consider a reverse mortgage.

ANSWER: A reverse mortgage could pay off your existing mortgage and eliminate the monthly mortgage payments you are currently paying. This could free up some income for you to play with each month.

Here's essentially how it would work. A reverse mortgage would pay off your existing mortgage balance of $145,000. Then, rather than having to make monthly interest and principal payments, the interest charged on the loan would simply add to the balance of the loan.

Let's assume your home will appreciate by 4 percent in the coming years, and the reverse mortgage interest rate averages 6 percent. Ten years from now, your home is worth $703,000 and the balance on the reverse mortgage is $260,000. In 20 years, your home is worth $1,040,000 and the loan balance is $465,000.

When you move from the home, sell the home or pass away, the loan becomes due, and any equity in the home goes to you or your heirs. In the event the mortgage balance is greater than the value of the home, you can walk away from the loan without paying a dime.

In addition to using a reverse mortgage to pay off your existing mortgage, you could also pull out extra cash, secure a line of credit or receive monthly income. Obviously, the more money you pull out, the less equity you'll have in your home.

Unlike a traditional mortgage, the startup costs are high, so you wouldn't want to use a reverse mortgage if you plan to move soon.

A reverse mortgage can be a great option, but for those who want to leave a truckload of money to their kids, paying off a home loan out of retirement income would be a better option."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Where to invest in real estate now

"Want to buy a house in Vancouver? Hope you have lots of cash. The average price of a house in Lotus Land hit $490,004 in February. Think about it for a second. That's nearly half a million dollars--and 26.5% higher than a year ago. Put another way, it now takes a household income of $142,000 a year to comfortably purchase a place to live. Wasn't the real estate market supposed to slow down this year? Apparently not. And it's not just Vancouver that's experiencing double-digit price increases so far this year. Canadian Real Estate Association (CREA) figures show the average home price from February 2005 to February 2006 rose 26% in Calgary and 15.5% in Edmonton, both economic boomtowns of late. But even relatively moribund Toronto saw an increase of nearly 6%, for an average price of almost $354,000. That's a lot of money to put on the line if you're thinking of investing in the real estate market--let alone looking for a place to live. No wonder people are...

Canada's recession resilience (article below)

There will be lots of information coming out today. Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney will be explaining (maybe vaguely) the reasons for the BoC rate drop and expectations we should have for the future, quantitative easing (printing money), and how this will all affect the Canadian economy. Here is an article from the Financial Post that expands on this. Keep an eye on this as it will affect bond rates/yields which could affect mortgage rates. Terence Corcoran: Quantitative schemes at the Bank of Canada Posted: April 22, 2009, 9:17 PM by Ron Nurwisah Terence Corcoran , central banks On Thursday we will learn what the Bank of Canada will do next to stimulate the economy, how it will apply the now famous “quantitative easing” phase of its ongoing effort.The bank is already giving away money, setting an overnight rate of 0.25% — “virtually zero,” as former governor John Crow says in his commentary . At the chartered banks, astute mortgage borrowers can almost lock in less than 2% for...