Don't trust Tom Selleck

Why would anybody accept being manipulated and deceived ? If that is how they win then their argument to begin with had no merit .

Happy winter solstice!

https://youtu.be/VKAl9UkgRKc?si=pQHFyfufbKW3KSNl
This is funny as heck

Family Guy - H.A.R.M. initiative promoted by Tom Selleck 00:45 - I wonder if he can half-lean on a fence post and say it.01:12 - If that’s too many numbers to dial, just say, “siri, I’m old.”Season 22, episode 03 ...

Waiting to hear from you Tom ☮️

tom

Tom Selleck y sus cambios a través de los años #shorts

Let me start by saying I don’t know really know what a reverse mortgage is, but I know what it sounds like it is. A mortgage is a loan from a bank that allows you to purchase a house, so it sounds like a reverse mortgage is, in some way, the undoing of that process. It’s not that big of a leap, and clearly I’m not the only one who thinks so. Why else would AAG have converted the bulk of their advertising budget to begging us to believe them? What I love so much about this is how Tom Selleck perfectly captures, what must be, the exasperated tone of the AAG executives. “Guys, guys, it’s not a trick to take your house! It’s just, it’s just a fu***ng loan, ok!? Come on!”

My suspicion is there’s some coded language in here. Paying it back “when you leave your home” probably means, “when you die,” and indeed, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau informs us that the loan will need to be paid back once you have moved into that great retirement community in the sky. Likewise your children, heirs, or surviving partner is responsible for repaying the loan if they wish to keep the house, otherwise the house gets sold.

Listen, if it’s true what Quigley tells us, and a reverse mortgage is NOT a way for the bank to take your home, then they should have called it something else. Did no one focus-group this term? It’s an easy fix. The most common type of reverse mortgage is a Home Equity Conversion Mortgage. Just call it that! That’s the kind of impenetrable jargon we’ve come to expect from the industry with whom we entrust all of our worldly assets. The word “reverse” is what’s causing problems. It sounds tricky. Like opposite day. No one likes opposite day.

“Hey, I overheard the VP’s talking in the parking lot. They’re considering you for a reverse promotion.”

“That doesn’t sound good.”

“It does not.”

I am so sick of these Selleck commercials. And now the annoying Nellie life's story. He is so smug and disinterested in the over-cue carded message at the same time. But hey, he's Tom Selleck, so he must be God to those elderly listeners. Nope. Just another annoying has-been with fake looking hair and stick-on mustache extenders needing some endorsement cash. I would pay him more to just go away. I love all the cliche opening sentences, "LOOK!" "...and let me tell you something..." Ok Tom, CAN'T WAIT TO HEAR NOW THAT YOU HAVE MY FULL ATTENTION!!

There are many drawbacks to reverse mortgages that are not discussed in this commercial. Is it misleading? That depends on what you consider "misleading". For reasons I discuss below, I believe that it absolutely is misleading. For starters, Tom paints an awfully rosy picture of a "home equity conversion mortgage", which is what these are called on a technical level. He says "it is just like any other loan". That is probably the most misleading part of the entire commercial, because it makes one feel that there are few, if any, drawbacks to it. Reverse mortgages are NOT just like any other loan. For one, they are secured by your home. The party that makes the loan to you has the right to foreclose for reasons that go beyond what exist in a typical mortgage, although this has some similarities to "typical" mortgages. For one, the homeowner agrees that should they fail to pay for all carrying costs- which includes insurance, taxes, utilities, and any other costs stated in the mortgage agreement- the mortgagee has the legal right to foreclose. This means that, in theory, if you have failed to pay an amount that might be a small fraction of the value of the home, the mortgagee may foreclose. Considering that HECM are reserved to those who are aged 62 and over, and generally that means they will be on fixed income, there is a strong possibility that at some point the homeowner will either forget, or neglect, or simply fall behind, on such costs. Moreover, even a failure to do regular upkeep- such as landscaping- can in certain cases trigger a foreclosure. Again, considering that HECM's are only for those 62 and older, the odds that the property will end up in a poor condition is high. Consider also that this includes regular maintenance- such as repairing the roof. Again, the mortgagee can foreclose for the homeowner's failure to repair the roof. HECM's are really nearly predatory loans, considering that they are geared to a vulnerable population which probably needs the loan for the very same reason that they cannot pay it back. In fact, there is an old adage: "If you need a reverse mortgage, you should not take out a reverse mortgage." In other commercials, by Tom Selleck and other celebrities, they have said things like, "Sure, take a vacation, enjoy your retirement." That is great in theory, but it almost never happens in this way. Studies show that the majority of those who take out a reverse mortgage do so out of necessity, not out of a desire to travel down the rivers of Europe. These are generally older people (some much older than 62); they have medical or other high debts, and in some cases still have a normal mortgage on their homes; they may be a widow or widower, and many have debilitating conditions. In essence, what these people are doing is converting unsecured medical, credit card, etc. debts into a secured debt where collateral is the home they live in. Thus, the one thing that they could count on in their life- their home- now is subject to a foreclosure, and for myriad of different reasons. Didn't repair your roof? Forgot to pay your taxes? Did you let your insurance lapse? Did you fail to get flood insurance like FEMA required? Did you let the bushes grow too big and forgot to clean up the fall leaves? Yup- all of these are reasons that you can have your home taken away from you. In addition, you lose a ton of equity in closing costs alone, so these loans are not cheap. Many seniors watch these commercials and feel as if a guy like Tom Selleck, who is politically conservative and probably reflects the seniors' more conservative outlook (he is on such police procedurals as "Blue Bloods"), surely must be honest and not misleading. It is not a coincidence that the actors who have been peddling these reverse mortgages in the media- Pat Bonne, the late actor/U.S. Senator, Fred Thompson, and now Tom Selleck are all conservatives. They appeal to the older cross-section of America who need, basically, an old, white conservative male to tell them that "it will all be ok, just go ahead and put pen to paper, Mabel". So, to answer the question, are these commercials misleading? Yes, at their core, they are quite misleading. However, because HECM's are backed by the federal government, and the federal government has a vested interest in HECM's, there is probably very little oversight from government agencies to stop these kinds of misleading advertisements. Not everyone who takes out an HECM/reverse mortgage is decrepit or incapable of handling their financial affairs. For some people, this may be a decent idea. But even for a couple who elects to take a reverse mortgage out in their 60s, too many bad things can happen in their lifetime. Consider this hypothetical: The aforementioned Mabel and her then-husband Buford, both 67, decide that they want the HECM to both pay a bunch of medical bills- Buford is diabetic and Mabel has arthritis- and if there is anything left over, they want to go on that oft-pitched "trip to Europe". So they do so, paying a hefty amount in closing costs, but given that the housing market is "hot", they still have enough equity and are able to cash out after the bills have been paid. They then go on the fabled "trip to Europe", which costs $20,000. They are doing well for a while after that, paying the taxes and utilities, paying the insurance. But then Buford's diabetes gets worse, and he has to go to the hospital. Buford worked for the state and gets a pension, a pretty good one. Mabel was a homemaker for many years, but in the last 10 years before she would have reached retirement age, she decided to enter the job market and she then worked as a secretary for an accountant. Her take-home pay was marginal, and she worked part time. She has earned just enough to be able to obtain Social Security retirement benefits, but not much. Buford, meanwhile, with his pension and social security, takes home net of $3,000 after taxes, which, combined with Mabel's modest income, is enough to cover the carrying costs for the home. But when Buford's condition rapidly deteriorates in his 70s and he passes away in a hospital, Mabel is left alone with a very modest income to support her. Even with any survivor benefits, she has the enormous costs of the funeral- over $15,000- for Buford, not to mention medical bills. The kids, both grown, try to pitch in, but they were hit by the bad economy and are unable to pay all of the costs off. Mabel soon finds herself deep in debt and is torn between paying off the balance on the funeral; medical bills, credit card bills with high interest rates, and a flat screen TV that she and Buford obtained from a "rent-to-own" down on Main Street, which carries with it interest rates that would be considered usurious were they charged by a credit card company. Mabel grew up in a time when she learned that "you pay your way through life, there is no "free lunch". So she struggles to pay the debts, even tries to go back into the labor force to work as a part time librarian at the local public library. But try as she might, she falls deeper and deeper in debt, to the point where she now is behind on the town's municipal bills for the last few quarters. She can barely pay the home's insurance. What is worse, a recent hurricane (for now these almost seem commonplace in Florida) caused a huge branch to fall on her home's roof. While it only did minor damage to the roof, the roof now has a leak, and water is coming into the house and is leaking behind the walls. Mold has started to set in. Her children have come over for a Thanksgiving visit and noticed the damage to the walls, and they told their mom that she has to repair the roof before it gets worse. Mabel calls a few contractors, who all quote to her $15,000 to $20,000 for repairing the roof. Mabel decides to just get a handyman to patch up the roof, for $2,000, which is still a lot of money. The town inspector notices that the property is falling into disrepair, and she is cited for violations, which are public record. The mortgagee finds out about these issues and files a lis pendens and a notice that they intend to file to foreclose, because she has failed to do proper upkeep and the property is falling into disrepair, not to mention the growing utilities delinquency that will soon trigger a tax sale. Mabel turns to various charities, churches, and her own children, to help, but by now it is likely too late and soon the foreclosure action will be filed and it will only be a matter of time before a judgment enters and the court orders a writ of possession that the Sheriff will execute upon, putting Mabel out of the home she and Buford made their own. While she can bide for time and even ask the court to give her more time (although she knows nothing of legal procedures, and certainly cannot afford an attorney), her days in the house are numbered. "Why, oh why did we ever take out this mortgage!?, she mutters, as she drinks a cup of Sanka, sitting in the den where she and Buford would watch Blue Bloods on Mondays. Then, as she turns on Fox News at Noon, to hear Hannity, the pleasing yet misleading voice of Mr. Selleck comes on... “Hey folks, let me tell you about a reverse

So Tom is such an investment expect at his age, money he has made, he has to do cheesy ads?

RMs are a loan, they can take out a lot of fees, to get you upside down, fast, so you cannot pay it off, after all, why did you get a RM?

The bank may not own your home, but they now are a partner in it, you used the house as collateral.

You can go into the hospital, need temporary outside home care, this will trigger the loan coming due. That loan requires you to constantly to live in it, leaving, even temporarily may trigger the loan, it varies on the policy, but that great trip you can use with the money, it better not be a year long world cruise.

Who owns your car with a loan, you, or the bank?

Most relatives aren’t going to inherit that house having to pay off the loan due. And that money, loan, is owed by the estate first, so the inheritors will either have to pay it off out of pocket, or through other estate’s assets. You are then going to get hit by an inheritance tax either way, so, add that to the cost, out of pocket, of buying off the loan.

I loved that dead actor, senator, as he flips the paper-guy a quarter, probably for a dollar paper, “RMs are based on yada yada, Reagan signed into law”, implying the GOP Reagan created it, provided protection on the loan, to homeowner.

RMs existed long before Ronnie, and his signature on a law was to protect the loan lenders, not the homeowner. That’s when the ads stated, because banks were more then happy with RMs, the loan was now guaranteed, read that as “their money”.

No it’s not a first rodeo, that’s why the ad is so clever with words. It’s not lying, just letting you fill in the blanks, with assumptions.

“If I thought reverse mortgages were a scam I wouldn’t be doing commercials to defend them.”

IF YOU DON'T TRUST TOM SELLECK THEN YOU DON'T TRUST AMERICA. Selleck / Hasselhoff 2020!

Plan on dying in your 20s,30s,40s? Everyday you wake up to go to work, you are one day closer to kicking it.

One day closer to waking up to see a grey hair.

You are not one of those that is not going to be take it well, are you?

Just curious, some would think The Greatest Generation deserves more respect, after all, for decades they dragged their ass out of bed each morning, when to work, sat in traffic, boring meetings, the grind, raised a family, payed taxes, and somehow hung on to retirement.

Good to know you are not heading that way, you are cashing out earlier. Because unfortunately your ilk that does survive to a ripe old age are the ones that then turn into “grumpy old get off my lawn” types, doing a 180, as they cannot cope.

I cannot stand listening to Selleck in those AAG commercials. The way it starts off with him saying "LOOK", as if he is ready to punch someone on the face, for doubting what HE (The Rodeo Wrangler) has to say. The whole commercial is on too long. It is as if they are trying to put the spin on, to cover for the negative reception his first commercial for AAG received, where they used him in his TV Chief of Police role, to suck people in. How could anyone not believe a Chief of Police!!! Gees... it looks like he would will do anything to make a buck. Even if it is a legitimate business, Selleck comes over as a Bully boy con man, along with that smirk grin at the end of the commercial.

I would like to get enough followers to get Tom's attention and request he do a question and answer session. Where he could address what actual personal experience has he had in reverse mortgages as well as people who have lost out from having a RM that could relay their experiences to Mr Selleck .. Because really nobody is above suspicion and he needs to explain himself so people can see where his moral compass is.

Feel free to recommend my site to people considering reverse mortgages!

My mother died at 90 in May and she had a reverse mortgage. The RM company’s paperwork done 12 years ago showed she would be sitting on $200k in equity today. Instead I have to hand house over to bank, it’s $300k underwater. They should be illegal.

I knew, who took one out not realizing it meant there would be no home sales proceeds with which to put his favorite grandchild through college. I had never seen that guy cry before, until we had to explain what he'd done. He was so ashamed of himself. I asked him to do me a personal favor, and live to age 100 to pay them back, but he was broken. He died about 6 months after he realized he'd been taken.

Take it from one who lost her home due to a predacious reverse mortgage company. Please do not believe the sweet talking scammers giving you advice on reverse mortgages. After using the money by putting into the betterment of my home I got a letter telling me to vacate the home because they had sold it. I tried to talk with the company but each time I called them I got a different person and they would not transfer my calls to the last person I had talked to. The company had gone directly to my tax office and told them not to send tax notices to me anymore to just send the bills to them. They fixed it so I ended up owing them for my taxes. I made arrangements to pay them back monthly and made 6 payments that they never sent to my bank plus a few money orders they did not cash. The interest grew in a 3?year period from $37000 to $107000. My property appraised for $179000 and they kicked me out and sold it for $55000. They barely made their money back and I was left homeless. Stay away from reverse mortgages if you want to live a nice comfortable life. They are scams and very dishonest. Broke my heart to see such a wonderful man like Tom Selleck selling such a bad product but I guess they pay him big bucks. I find it hard to believe he believes in it either. Just a paycheck

I don’t know why he did that commercial but I wish I was in a position to sue him for it. I followed his words and now the bank owns my home. I should have been suspicious when AAG insisted on a “closing” before allowing me any money. A closing is supposed to be when you sell your property. It covers expenses such as checking that your deed is clear and the cost of appraisal - and usually is about $3,000. AAG charged me $20,000 for closing and it didn’t even cover anything - I had to pay extra for appraisal, deed check, etc. With the interest they charged, it wasn’t long until I owed AAG more than my home was worth - and they already had the closing so my home is now there’s. Tom Selleck, I hope you roast in HELL.

illis), and Robert De Niro sells Subarus.
I have no issues with celebrity endorsements in general. I simply take exception to those that I feel are predatory or potentially predatory. This idea that "it's not a way for the bank to get your house" is somewhat misleading. Of course it's potentially a way for them to get your house eventually. The interest you pay on the mortgage is added to the principle and compounded so the debt on the house grows. If you have no heirs you may not care. If you have heirs then you hope they can afford to get a loan to pay off the reverse mortgage. It's a complex subject. This idea that he "checked it out" is horse f***s. It's like he's vouching for it.
The consumer protection folks caution folks to "be wary of sales pitches" regarding reverser mortgages. The salesmen try to sell other things with the mortgage like the car dealers trying to get you to buy protection packages and extended warranties.
Thankfully people who want a reverse mortgage have to see an independent counsellor before doing the deal.
Plus, I just don't like Mr. Selleck.

Some people I know made the (basically irreversible) decision to do a Reverse Mortgage then they fell in love with a charity and would like to have the sales proceeds on the house upon their death go to that charity. They were tricked into thinking only in terms of their kids and grandkids having assets of their own and that they wouldn't need the proceeds from the house. In other instances the character of the neighborhood changed and then they couldn't sell the house to relocate. In another case they inherited a more suitable house they were head over heels for and they had to pass up a chance to move to that residence because it would mean the mortgaged house would just sit empty (except for the number of days they had to show they were there to keep the Company from taking possession). And in still another one, where the couple forgot that they'd meant to will the residence to their best friends, people who had been very kind to them all their lives and put them on their path to prosperity. These people have more money than they think they do. They just get frightened when the TV newsreader lady says they need millions and millions to get by and they panic - they wanna do something, anything, when doing nothing is sometimes better.

Finally, there was one guy I was convinced, just sort of withered and died because he had no "tomorrow". Every remaining step in his life was locked in; robbed of the excitement and freedom of making new decisions and dealing with changing circumstances. There were no open dates anywhere on his calendar, out to infinity and all uncertainty and challenges had been erased and he was like "what is life even about, without those?".

We want to shelter the older people we know, and protect them and make sure nothing bad happens, but they need some liberty and paradoxically, "being free" to sign up for a reverse mortgage is sort of like "being free" to put a bullet in your own head at the time and place of your choosing.

He does own a Ranch. He probably bought it from a bank that foreclosed on this mortgage scam.

Instead of selling your home and getting the full equity out of it, let a bank give you a small percentage of what it's worth and they'll keep it when you die. Getting 70% you could have gotten or passed down to whom ever choose.

As long as you never leave the home for more than 30 days, like if you go to skilled nursing for therapy like a lot of seniors do after surgeries and broken legs, ankles, feet, anything really.

Just looked up what a reverse mtg is; basically a sh*tty heloc or home equity loan. The loan balance increases over time as interest on the loan and fees accumulate. The loan generally does not have to be repaid until the last borrower no longer occupies the home as their primary residence.

So basically.... you take a loan out against your home and the loan doesn’t have to be repaid until you “leave” the home. And in many cases leave means not coming back or can’t payback the loan so the home ends up going to the bank

He’s a dirt bag for pushing that crap , just like Frank Thomas is a dirt bag for pushing that pill crap ,Joe Namath is a dirt bag for pushing that insurance crap. Celebrities need to stay out of commercials ,nobody gives a crap what they think. They don’t believe in any of those products, they’re just doing it to get the money. Oh yeah, and that my pillow guy is more than a dirt bag, he’s a scum bag. He didn’t start wearing that cross until he got an F rating from the Better Business Bureau.

Look Mr Magum PI, what the f**k is wrong, from PI to scumbag, ripping up millions, maybe Tommy PI you need to hire a PI for this scam. Fu***ng annoying, lost Magnum PI soul.

This turned me off from the very beginning. It's not like reverse mortgage's were created to really HELP anyone. Of course, it's all about profit or it would not exist. I find it disgusting that this man would take advantage of a vulnerable population for what - money, of course. And even more heinous that he has more money already, than the average individual. So, shame on him and shame on anyone that buys this bull without researching thoroughly to make sure this is a viable option. WhenEVER this commercial comes on, I immediately turn off the sound after sending a few swear words at him. Disgusted.

There are many drawbacks to reverse mortgages that are not discussed in this commercial. Is it misleading? That depends on what you consider "misleading". For reasons I discuss below, I believe that it absolutely is misleading. For starters, Tom paints an awfully rosy picture of a "home equity conversion mortgage", which is what these are called on a technical level. He says "it is just like any other loan". That is probably the most misleading part of the entire commercial, because it makes one feel that there are few, if any, drawbacks to it. Reverse mortgages are NOT just like any other loan. For one, they are secured by your home. The party that makes the loan to you has the right to foreclose for reasons that go beyond what exist in a typical mortgage, although this has some similarities to "typical" mortgages. For one, the homeowner agrees that should they fail to pay for all carrying costs- which includes insurance, taxes, utilities, and any other costs stated in the mortgage agreement- the mortgagee has the legal right to foreclose. This means that, in theory, if you have failed to pay an amount that might be a small fraction of the value of the home, the mortgagee may foreclose. Considering that HECM are reserved to those who are aged 62 and over, and generally that means they will be on fixed income, there is a strong possibility that at some point the homeowner will either forget, or neglect, or simply fall behind, on such costs. Moreover, even a failure to do regular upkeep- such as landscaping- can in certain cases trigger a foreclosure. Again, considering that HECM's are only for those 62 and older, the odds that the property will end up in a poor condition is high. Consider also that this includes regular maintenance- such as repairing the roof. Again, the mortgagee can foreclose for the homeowner's failure to repair the roof. HECM's are really nearly predatory loans, considering that they are geared to a vulnerable population which probably needs the loan for the very same reason that they cannot pay it back. In fact, there is an old adage: "If you need a reverse mortgage, you should not take out a reverse mortgage." In other commercials, by Tom Selleck and other celebrities, they have said things like, "Sure, take a vacation, enjoy your retirement." That is great in theory, but it almost never happens in this way. Studies show that the majority of those who take out a reverse mortgage do so out of necessity, not out of a desire to travel down the rivers of Europe. These are generally older people (some much older than 62); they have medical or other high debts, and in some cases still have a normal mortgage on their homes; they may be a widow or widower, and many have debilitating conditions. In essence, what these people are doing is converting unsecured medical, credit card, etc. debts into a secured debt where collateral is the home they live in. Thus, the one thing that they could count on in their life- their home- now is subject to a foreclosure, and for myriad of different reasons. Didn't repair your roof? Forgot to pay your taxes? Did you let your insurance lapse? Did you fail to get flood insurance like FEMA required? Did you let the bushes grow too big and forgot to clean up the fall leaves? Yup- all of these are reasons that you can have your home taken away from you. In addition, you lose a ton of equity in closing costs alone, so these loans are not cheap. Many seniors watch these commercials and feel as if a guy like Tom Selleck, who is politically conservative and probably reflects the seniors' more conservative outlook (he is on such police procedurals as "Blue Bloods"), surely must be honest and not misleading. It is not a coincidence that the actors who have been peddling these reverse mortgages in the media- Pat Bonne, the late actor/U.S. Senator, Fred Thompson, and now Tom Selleck are all conservatives. They appeal to the older cross-section of America who need, basically, an old, white conservative male to tell them that "it will all be ok, just go ahead and put pen to paper, Mabel". So, to answer the question, are these commercials misleading? Yes, at their core, they are quite misleading. However, because HECM's are backed by the federal government, and the federal government has a vested interest in HECM's, there is probably very little oversight from government agencies to stop these kinds of misleading advertisements. Not everyone who takes out an HECM/reverse mortgage is decrepit or incapable of handling their financial affairs. For some people, this may be a decent idea. But even for a couple who elects to take a reverse mortgage out in their 60s, too many bad things can happen in their lifetime. Consider this hypothetical: The aforementioned Mabel and her then-husband Buford, both 67, decide that they want the HECM to both pay a bunch of medical bills- Buford is diabetic and Mabel has arthritis- and if there is anything left over, they want to go on that oft-pitched "trip to Europe". So they do so, paying a hefty amount in closing costs, but given that the housing market is "hot", they still have enough equity and are able to cash out after the bills have been paid. They then go on the fabled "trip to Europe", which costs $20,000. They are doing well for a while after that, paying the taxes and utilities, paying the insurance. But then Buford's diabetes gets worse, and he has to go to the hospital. Buford worked for the state and gets a pension, a pretty good one. Mabel was a homemaker for many years, but in the last 10 years before she would have reached retirement age, she decided to enter the job market and she then worked as a secretary for an accountant. Her take-home pay was marginal, and she worked part time. She has earned just enough to be able to obtain Social Security retirement benefits, but not much. Buford, meanwhile, with his pension and social security, takes home net of $3,000 after taxes, which, combined with Mabel's modest income, is enough to cover the carrying costs for the home. But when Buford's condition rapidly deteriorates in his 70s and he passes away in a hospital, Mabel is left alone with a very modest income to support her. Even with any survivor benefits, she has the enormous costs of the funeral- over $15,000- for Buford, not to mention medical bills. The kids, both grown, try to pitch in, but they were hit by the bad economy and are unable to pay all of the costs off. Mabel soon finds herself deep in debt and is torn between paying off the balance on the funeral; medical bills, credit card bills with high interest rates, and a flat screen TV that she and Buford obtained from a "rent-to-own" down on Main Street, which carries with it interest rates that would be considered usurious were they charged by a credit card company. Mabel grew up in a time when she learned that "you pay your way through life, there is no "free lunch". So she struggles to pay the debts, even tries to go back into the labor force to work as a part time librarian at the local public library. But try as she might, she falls deeper and deeper in debt, to the point where she now is behind on the town's municipal bills for the last few quarters. She can barely pay the home's insurance. What is worse, a recent hurricane (for now these almost seem commonplace in Florida) caused a huge branch to fall on her home's roof. While it only did minor damage to the roof, the roof now has a leak, and water is coming into the house and is leaking behind the walls. Mold has started to set in. Her children have come over for a Thanksgiving visit and noticed the damage to the walls, and they told their mom that she has to repair the roof before it gets worse. Mabel calls a few contractors, who all quote to her $15,000 to $20,000 for repairing the roof. Mabel decides to just get a handyman to patch up the roof, for $2,000, which is still a lot of money. The town inspector notices that the property is falling into disrepair, and she is cited for violations, which are public record. The mortgagee finds out about these issues and files a lis pendens and a notice that they intend to file to foreclose, because she has failed to do proper upkeep and the property is falling into disrepair, not to mention the growing utilities delinquency that will soon trigger a tax sale. Mabel turns to various charities, churches, and her own children, to help, but by now it is likely too late and soon the foreclosure action will be filed and it will only be a matter of time before a judgment enters and the court orders a writ of possession that the Sheriff will execute upon, putting Mabel out of the home she and Buford made their own. While she can bide for time and even ask the court to give her more time (although she knows nothing of legal procedures, and certainly cannot afford an attorney), her days in the house are numbered. "Why, oh why did we ever take out this mortgage!?, she mutters, as she drinks a cup of Sanka, sitting in the den where she and Buford would watch Blue Bloods on Mondays. Then, as she turns on Fox News at Noon, to hear Hannity, the pleasing yet misleading voice of Mr. Selleck comes on... “Hey folks, let me tell you about a reverse mortgage…”