
Graham and Ann own their own home without a mortgage and want some extra income. They have no children, so aren’t concerned about the idea of “eating their home”, as long as they aren’t required to move out. They want to make sure, however, that the income lasts until the second of them dies.
A friend suggests that a reverse annuity mortgage might help. Graham and Ann find out that it involves a mortgage linked to an annuity contract, which means that Graham and Ann get regular income from the annuity. The amounts they receive (including any initial lump sum) will have interest charged at 11% per annum.
And the growing total could mean that there will be nothing left of their equity by the end. While that doesn’t particularly worry Graham and Ann, they’re concerned that the costs might be a bit high. They decide to ask their lawyers for advice.
What they discover about the costs makes Graham and Ann wonder whether a reverse annuity mortgage is the right option after all. Not only is the interest rate on the mortgage itself quite high (more than the going rate for a normal home loan) but there are other costs as well. Their lawyers will be charging about $700, including expenses. There’s also a valuation fee for their home and a “placement fee” payable to the financial planner who introduced them to the provider.