FT Logo

Copy article

FT Editor Banner

FCA's lifetime and retirement interest-only mortgages market study

Journalist: Tom Dunstan, FTAdviser

ended 04. May 2026

Recently, the Financial Conduct Authority is launching a market study into lifetime and retirement interest-only mortgages, amid an anticipated rise in the use of equity release (full story at the link below).

https://www.ftadviser.com/content/82209684-cebd-4b05-bdf2-c89f8111a6a1 

This follows the authority suggesting that older homeowners “may increasingly have to use their housing wealth to achieve financial security and comfort in later life”.

What do you think of this proposal? Will it be beneficial? What kind of changes to equity release could be brought in?

4 responses from the Newspage community

Copy all

Copy

Bringing clarity to the distribution of Later Life mortgages, including Equity Release and Retirement Interest-Only mortgages, will be hugely beneficial to borrowers looking for advice, given the role that such lending optionswill take in the future. With many with similar features to traditional Interest Only mortgages, there is less complexity for qualification requirements; however i think what is more important is a review of the way products are designed and priced, locking borrowers into deals up to 3% higher than traditional mortgage products and for the lifetime of the deal, whilst rates are at their unfortunate peak. This additional cost can easily negate the advice provided or put clients in a worse financial position over time if they have little choice.
Copy

The FCA study is needed, but it must never turn into a nod to push older homeowners into borrowing against their property. Later-life lending can be powerful, but it is not a quick fix for a weak retirement plan.

More clients are reaching retirement with mortgage debt, pension gaps, family commitments and care costs, so housing wealth will become part of the conversation. But equity release and RIOs mortgages are not simple products. They can affect inheritance, benefits, care choices, downsizing plans and the client’s freedom later in life.

I want clearer education, better product comparison and advice that looks at the whole person, not just the property value. Clients need to understand the long-term cost of rolled-up interest, the alternatives, and what happens if circumstances change.

For the right client, later-life lending can improve quality of life. For the wrong client, it can quietly remove options. The FCA has to make sure this market grows responsibly, not aggressively.
Copy

The review is well considered - I can’t remember a time when the regulator has sought such extensive input from the industry - and it is arguably long overdue. More homeowners will rely on property wealth in retirement, but the market needs clearer comparisons, stronger advice standards and an improved focus on long-term thinking. For many, standard mortgages, retirement interest-only (RIO) and lifetime mortgages all could be an option. The key is ensuring homeowners are clearly presented with all available options, not just equity release, before making a decision. This is where the Financial Conduct Authority can really help steer the market.
Copy

The FCA study is a sensible move because later life borrowing is becoming more important at exactly the point when product complexity, vulnerability and long term consequences matter most. If more older homeowners are expected to rely on housing wealth for financial security, regulators need stronger evidence that these products are being explained, sold and monitored properly rather than normalised as the next funding gap solution.

The benefit of the study is that it could push the market beyond marketing language and into suitability, fees, flexibility and consumer understanding. The real question is not whether equity release can help. It can in some cases. The question is whether people fully understand the trade off between present comfort and future options, including inheritance, refinancing limits and the cost of the wrong structure.

The best outcome would be better comparability, clearer advice standards and tougher scrutiny of who these products are actually right for.