Are You Fulfilling Your Duty… or Just Staying in Your Lane?

Why advisors may be one lawsuit away from needing to disclose the full picture, including housing wealth strategies

Most advisors would agree with this simple premise:

A family with a 30-year mortgage…
A family with a 15-year mortgage…
A family using a HELOC strategically…
A family with a free and clear home…
A family using a reverse mortgage…

…will not experience the same retirement outcome.

Different structures. Different cash flows. Different risks. Different results.

So, here’s the question:

If the outcomes are different, doesn’t it make sense to at least evaluate which structure is most appropriate for a given client?

Not recommend blindly.
Not implement recklessly.
Just… consider it.

The Quiet Line Advisors Don’t Talk About

There’s an unspoken boundary in the advisory world.

Many advisors operate under the belief that:

“If I’m not compensated for it… or if it’s outside my lane… I probably shouldn’t go there.”

On the surface, that sounds reasonable. Stay compliant. Stay focused. Stay safe.

But here’s where things get uncomfortable.

What happens when “staying in your lane” conflicts with acting in your client’s best interest?

We’ve Seen This Movie Before

This isn’t theoretical.

There was a time when advisors routinely avoided conversations around long-term care.

• It was complex
• It wasn’t always compensated well
• It involved uncomfortable conversations about aging and decline

And then something changed.

Families began asking questions.

“Why didn’t anyone tell us this was a risk?”
“Why wasn’t this even discussed?”
“Why are we now depleting assets that could have been protected?”

In some cases, that frustration turned into legal action.

According to industry reporting and legal commentary, failure to address foreseeable risks like long-term care has increasingly been cited in disputes involving advisor responsibility. Sources such as Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) and guidance aligned with the Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards have consistently emphasized a duty to act in the client’s best interest, which includes identifying material risks and planning gaps.

The expectation shifted.

Not “did you sell a solution?”
But “did you inform the client?” 

Now Ask Yourself This

What are today’s “uncomfortable conversations” that advisors are avoiding?

Housing wealth is near the top of that list.

Particularly when it comes to reverse mortgages.

Not because they aren’t relevant.
But because they’re misunderstood, unfamiliar, or perceived as off-limits.

The Fiduciary Question

If you hold yourself out as a fiduciary, or operate under a best interest standard, you’re not just managing assets.

You’re helping clients make decisions that impact:

• Longevity of income
• Sequence and volatility risk
• In home care or health care risks
• Tax efficiency
• Legacy outcomes
• Access to liquidity for the unforeseen events

And housing wealth touches every one of those.

So, here’s the real question:

If a strategy exists that could improve a client’s outcome, reduce risk, or preserve assets… do you have an obligation to at least make them aware of it?

Even if you don’t implement it.
Even if you don’t get paid for it.

“But I’m Not Allowed to Talk About That…”

This is one of the most common responses.

And in some cases, it may be true. Firms have policies. Broker-dealers have guardrails. But if that’s the case, it’s worth getting clarity.

In writing.

Because there’s a meaningful difference between:

• “We don’t offer that solution”
  and
• “You are not allowed to inform a client that this exists”

If your firm is restricting the conversation entirely, consider asking:

• Is this a compliance restriction or a product limitation?
• Are you restricted from recommending, or from educating or informing?
• What happens if a client could be materially better off and this wasn’t discussed?

You might even ask about indemnification.

If you are explicitly prohibited from discussing a strategy that could benefit a client, should the firm bear responsibility for that omission?

That’s not a rebellious question.
That’s a risk management question.

For CFP® Professionals: A Higher Standard?

If you carry the Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards designation, the expectations are even clearer.

The CFP Board’s Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct require:

• Acting in the client’s best interest
• Providing advice that is based on a reasonable and prudent professional judgment
• Considering the client’s entire financial situation

That doesn’t mean you must implement every strategy.

But it does suggest you should not ignore material planning opportunities, especially those that could meaningfully impact outcomes. 

This Isn’t About Reverse Mortgages

Not really.

This is about something bigger.

It’s about whether the advisory profession continues to evolve toward:

Comprehensive advice… or compartmentalized guidance.

Reverse mortgages simply happen to be one of the most visible examples of a strategy that:

• Impacts retirement sustainability
• Alters portfolio drawdown strategies
• Provides a future resource to access for in home care needs
• Is often excluded from the conversation

A Thought Experiment

Fast forward five years.

A client’s estate has been significantly reduced.

Their children begin reviewing financial decisions.

They discover that:

• There were strategies available to reduce withdrawals during down markets
• There were ways to access housing wealth more efficiently
• There were tools that could have preserved more of the estate

And then they ask:

“Was this ever discussed?”

What would your answer be?

Where We Go From Here

This isn’t a call to become a reverse mortgage expert.

It’s a call to:

• Stay curious
• Stay informed
• Stay aligned with your client’s best interest

If that leads to collaboration, great.
If it leads to client introductions, even better.
If it leads to a better outcome for your client, that’s the point.

If You’re Navigating This Internally

We recognize that many advisors operate within firm constraints.

If you’d like support in:

• Framing these conversations with compliance teams
• Providing educational resources that are balanced and appropriate
• Understanding where housing wealth fits within a broader plan

We’re happy to help.

No pressure. No agenda.

Just clarity.

Final Thought

You don’t have to do everything.

But you may need to acknowledge more than you currently are.

Because the standard is shifting.

And the question is no longer:

“Did you implement the strategy?”

It’s becoming:

“Did you make the client aware it existed?”

If you’d like to learn more about how accessing housing wealth can impact your client’s retirement, please reach out to our team or attend an upcoming Advisor Insights session