Foreclosures Turning Personal Lives Upside Down

June 24th, 2009

Foreclosed Houses are not just numbers and statistics for pundits to analyze behind closed doors – these are realities that are turning personal lives upside down.

Last autumn Donna Sikora organized her 50th birthday celebrations in the house that had been her home for long 23 years. She intensified the celebrations out of a sense of trepidation not knowing when she would get the marching orders. Her lender, Washington Mutual was expected to take over her home in April. But Sikora is determined not to give up an inch to foreclosure without putting up a fight.

After the trauma of a divorce in 2006 she tried to put her life back into order. Two years earlier her ex-husband and she had together refinanced their mortgage to construct an extra room with a ceiling high enough to accommodate a tall Christmas tree. But even before the renovation had been completed divorce threatened. Sikora negotiated with her lender and had the mortgage transferred to her name. Her lender did not seek income proof – a practice that is being discredited today.

According to Sikora she had contacted Washington Mutual to alter loan terms. The bank told her that it would be possible only after she missed two mortgage payments. All she had to do was to wait for the bank to contact her with the papers. But that never happened. Instead she found herself facing foreclosure.

Washington Mutual has now been taken over by JPMorgan Chase. Its spokesperson, Tom Kelly refused to comment at large but only remarked that although foreclosure proceedings have been initiated the bank was trying to alter loan terms. But she will have to prove that with her income she will be able to continue with her mortgage loan amounting to $415,000. Kelly said, “In some cases, the borrower’s income is just not enough to afford the home. We’re verifying the customer’s income and assessing whether a modification is possible that works for both the borrower and the lender.”

Sikora was interviewed but she remained vague about how much she earned on her two jobs as a hair stylist. She elaborated that the bank should also take into count the alimony she got from the divorce settlement as well as the rent she got apart from tips given to her for her hairstyling job. Her contention was that her financial position had improved since the time she took out the mortgage loan. It is this that has given her the impetus to fight for her home that she shares with her two dogs and her daughter.