[EBH]

I don’t know how it would work under a reorganization?

The company owns the asset, not the homeowner. So if the BK court orders the homes sold...most likely to another company, it seems to me the homeowner loses.

[DannyTN]

From ConsumerFinance.gov "If I take out a reverse mortgage loan, does the lender own my home? No. When you take out a reverse mortgage loan, the title to your home remains with you. Most reverse mortgages are Home Equity Conversion Mortgages (HECMs)."

[DannyTN]

So I think the way this works, is that the Reverse Mortgage company has a lien on the house for the amount that they have paid the homeowner.

But I don’t think they can enforce the lien until the home owner dies or breaks one of the covenants, such as paying property taxes or keeping the home in good repair.

I’m not sure what recourse the homeowner has when the reverse mortgage company stops making payments, except that they can pay off the reverse mortgage company and refinance with another reverse mortgage company to continue drawing equity out of the home.

[zeugma]

The company owns the asset, not the homeowner. So if the BK court orders the homes sold...most likely to another company, it seems to me the homeowner loses.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if this were the case. However, when you look at it from the other direction, a homeowner with a mortgage, the asset is owned by the entity holding the loan, not the 'homeowner'. So, in a reverse mortgage, wouldn't the deed be owned by the individual?

I'd be fairly surprised if it were handled like that, in truth, because the banksters always own everything.