Originally Posted by
iceman
I am surprised that well informed punters like some on here are questioning the ethics of the RELs.
Bear with me while I share my recent experience. Over the last 3-4 weeks, I have been assisting a friend and his sister to deal with some financial pressures on their parents and themselves as a result. The father had a stroke about 10 years ago and is wheelchair bound. Apart from that, they are both in reasonably good health for people in their mid seventies.
They struggle physically with him in a wheelchair and also struggle to make ends meet. In fact, they are supported financially by their 2 children with small weekly top ups just to make ends meet and to buy half decent groceries. Often baked beans on toast is all they can afford.This is difficult for the "children", neither of whom are high income earners. The car is small and unsuitable for an ageing lady to service her husband's needs. She would like new curtains and some rooms painted in their $650,000 fairly moderate, nice and warm home. They do not want to nor feel like they have to go to a retirement home.
I know them well and find it sad that they have to live their twilight years like this, much harder than they deserve. So I discussed RELs with them(the children) and they asked me to get the info. I've been in contact with Heartland and they were extremely helpful and caring. At no stage did they try a hard sell. Quite to the contrary, they were very supportive, informative and very clear that they require family to buy in and legal advice sought.
After a lot of discussion, I am pleased that the family have come to their own conclusion (I've not give any advice for or against, only explained the option) that they will apply for a loan to upgrade the car, get new curtains and possibly paint some rooms in the house. They may further seek a monthly or annual small top up. In my view, if they do this, it will make the twilight years of this lovely old couple MUCH more enjoyable and easier. Unless they both live beyond 105-110 years and continue spending as they are now, the effect on their equity is absolutely minor by any stretch of the imagination.
Their children will also be relieved not having to continue their small top ups, which in reality is just buying their own heritage.
So as fish says above, this situation and the solution provided by RELs, is "entirely in keeping with current morals and ethics" as far as I am concerned. Continuing as they're doing now is not.