Disabled Extreme Makeover winners may lose home

[Darth Wong]

A deaf couple's modest 980 square foot house was remade by volunteers to help them raise their autistic son. But they were forced to remortgage it after their health insurance company refused to pay for treatments for their son, and they're now looking at losing the house.

'Extreme Makeover' Family Facing Foreclosure
Last Update: 8:38 am

OAK PARK, Mich. (WXYZ) - Four years ago, millions of television viewers watched as a deaf couple marveled at the renovations to their home that would help them better accommodate their blind, autistic son.

But now the couple, Judy and Larry Vardon, worry that the home could face foreclosure. They were featured in a two-hour episode of "Extreme Makeover: Home Edition" that set a ratings record for the show when broadcast Nov. 6, 2004.

Weighed down by a mortgage payment that has almost doubled since the makeover and medical insurance that doesn't cover autism treatment for 16-year-old Lance, the Vardons are clinging to the hope that Larry will keep his job at Chrysler LLC's Sterling Heights stamping plant. The company is on the brink of bankruptcy as it and the other Detroit automakers appeal to Congress for emergency loans.

"I'm afraid I'm going to lose my house now," Judy Vardon, using sign language through an interpreter, told The Macomb Daily of Mount Clemens. "This house really belongs to Lance. This is his environment. He can't speak out for himself, and I hope we can save this house."

ABC said 20.5 million viewers saw a crew led by host Ty Pennington rehabilitate the Vardons' 980-square-foot house near Detroit from the inside out, including installing cameras and flat-screen monitors allowing the Vardons to monitor Lance.

After the makeover, the couple refinanced the mortgage, and their monthly payments have nearly doubled - from $1,200 to $2,300. They had debts of $20,000 for the boy's therapy alone.

"We didn't have bad spending habits," Judy Vardon said. "My husband got laid off for a time, and insurance wouldn't cover Lance's autism therapy and some other things like his vision and special dental work."

The couple are working with a nonprofit group that aids families in crisis to help them negotiate a lower mortgage rate.

The Vardons remain grateful to "Extreme Makeover" and the volunteers who worked to renovate their house and make it safer for Lance.

"We're a close family that loves each other," Judy Vardon said. "I feel that I was given this life to show others that you can face these challenges."

Now check out the comments made by people posting in response to the article. Almost all of them are ranting that these people are idiots for not managing their finances properly. Because, you know, any responsible person with a factory job should be able to pay for autism therapy out of his own pocket.

I'm sure some of the right-wingers will be along any moment to explain that people like this need to pay more taxes, because they're underpaying right now.

[Stargate Nerd]

I believe it was SirNitram who posted an article a while ago, outlining how a lot of the recent foreclosures were due to medical and health reason. Well there's horrible another example right here.

[Darth Wong]

I believe it was SirNitram who posted an article a while ago, outlining how a lot of the recent foreclosures were due to medical and health reason. Well there's horrible another example right here.

I think that if you go to the original website and read the comments, they make it all the more horrible. People just don't get it.

[KrauserKrauser]

What I don't get with respect to Extreme Makeover Home Edition is the increased taxes and costs of the houses for the family. In only certain circumstances do I see the show pay of the remainder of the mortgage which would mean that for the most part there would be the same mortgage payment required along with a drastically increased property tax via the increase in property vaule once they get a new assessment from their local government. How they expect the people to pay that, I don't understand.

For the most part alot of the help is basically giving the family a restart, which is amazing, but the houses will eventually head in the same direction unless they suddenly have more time and funds to maintain this new, much larger home. They weren't able to afford the upkeep on a much smaller house before, how can they afford to upkeep a much larger one?

I don't know the difference between old vs. new home maintenance costs, would it be so significant that a 50% increase in size of house would only require as much maintenance as the old size if it's all new construction?

As per the OP, yes, it's terrible and is a valid argument that socialized healthcare could have reduced the expense on the family. I guess with an increased social safety net they would not have needed the new house in the first place but at what point does the lack of home maintenance become an issue of their negligence. I would like to know how well these people are taking care of these new houses and if they are being run down as their previous houses were.

[General Zod]

As per the OP, yes, it's terrible and is a valid argument that socialized healthcare could have reduced the expense on the family. I guess with an increased social safety net they would not have needed the new house in the first place but at what point does the lack of home maintenance become an issue of their negligence. I would like to know how well these people are taking care of these new houses and if they are being run down as their previous houses were.

I'd almost be willing to lay money that they weren't able to properly take care of them because of their child's medical expenses.

[KrauserKrauser]

That may be the issue in this case, I am speaking generally of the show. For instance, there was a couple that had taken in like 9 kids from Haiti and inner city Chicago. I definitely believe they did a good thing, but taking on more than they can afford is somehow a responsible decision?

Alot of the stories you hear on EMOHE, wheee acronyms, are alot of medical issues or spouse just died money related problems, but in some cases the people just made decisions that were stupid and paid the price.

One was a woman that had decided to turn her home into a day care, which is great, alot of people do it. However, she was allowing people to just dump their children on her for free and then gave them free stuff in addition to that. If she wanted to run a business, then that is one thing, but starting a business with a horrible unworkable business model and then being surprised it doesn't sustain itself shouldn't be the revelation that it is considered to be in the show.

[Vendetta]

I believe it was SirNitram who posted an article a while ago, outlining how a lot of the recent foreclosures were due to medical and health reason. Well there's horrible another example right here.

Something like 35-40% of foreclosures, if I recall.

Medical costs are the largest single cause of personal debt in the United States.

[Kodiak]

If I remember correctly, give-away and gameshow prizes come with an enormous tax burden. This could be internet gossip, but I recall hearing of warehouses in SoCal filled with game show prizes that couldn't be claimed because people couldn't afford the taxes on them.

I hope there can be some sort of an effort to help these people. Nobody should be punished for trying to save their son.

[AMT]

If I remember correctly, give-away and gameshow prizes come with an enormous tax burden. This could be internet gossip, but I recall hearing of warehouses in SoCal filled with game show prizes that couldn't be claimed because people couldn't afford the taxes on them.

I hope there can be some sort of an effort to help these people. Nobody should be punished for trying to save their son.

Which (sorry to be slightly OT) is why said shows should take care of those taxes. It's silly how shows like Deal or no Deal can claim to give away a million dollars when such a large chunk of it goes to taxes.

[Sute]

I believe it was SirNitram who posted an article a while ago, outlining how a lot of the recent foreclosures were due to medical and health reason. Well there's horrible another example right here.

Something like 35-40% of foreclosures, if I recall.

Medical costs are the largest single cause of personal debt in the United States.

I believe that 49% of those who responded said that medical costs played at least some part in the loss of their home.

Yep, 49%.

[TrailerParkJawa]

If I remember correctly, give-away and gameshow prizes come with an enormous tax burden. This could be internet gossip, but I recall hearing of warehouses in SoCal filled with game show prizes that couldn't be claimed because people couldn't afford the taxes on them.

I hope there can be some sort of an effort to help these people. Nobody should be punished for trying to save their son.

Game winning are treated like ordinary income. So if you win say $100,000 and and you live in California you can expect a tax burden of $45,000 which would cover both federal and state taxes.

If you win a physical prize like a car or washer/dryer then the value of those items is treated like ordinary income. For some folks this means they'd have to sell it just to pay the taxes.

I feel bad for this family because it really doesn't seem like they did anything irresponsible. I am curious why they refinanced, but in the end it comes down to medical bills are crushing them, which is a nightmare too many Americans have to face.

[Kanastrous]

If everyone who enjoyed watching that episode of the makeover show were to send the family a nickel, they'd be out of the financial woods, at least, for the time being.

[General Trelane (Retired)]

The comments on the WXYZ site are stomach churning to say the least.

Regarding treatment of Autism Spectrum Disorder, even here in Canada families are vulnerable because Applied Behavioural Analysis is expensive and the funding coverage is very inconsistent. Here are some funding details for ABA:

Alberta: Funds up to $60,000/year per child for ABA up to age eighteen
British Columbia: Funds up to $20,000/year up to age six
Manitoba: Funds 36 hours of ABA per week up to age six, with five of those hours provided by the family
New Brunswick: Funds 20 hours of intervention up to age five
Newfoundland & Labrador: Funds up to $40,000 for 30 hours a week for two years up to age six
Northwest Territories: No formal ABA program in place
Nunavut: No formal ABA program in place
Nova Scotia: Funds 15 hours/week for six months, then 10 hours a week for a further six months. Only available for a year to randomly selected children up to six years of age.
Ontario: Funds some ABA programs with a previous cut-off at age six. Now, parents complain that children are being cut off arbitrarily if they are doing poorly or doing too well
Prince Edward Island: Funds up to $200 a week up to the age six
Quebec: Funds 20 hours per week for ABA programs for ages two to five
Saskatchewan: Funds up to 10 hours with very limited availability or access
Yukon: Full coverage up to the age nineteen

Federally, there was a bill in the Commons a couple of years ago to make ABA funding part of medicare, but it was defeated. Here in Alberta there is a high degree of coverage, but the provincial government tried scaling that back a few years ago as well; fortunately they backed down due to the public outcry.

My 9-year-old son's best friend has ASD, and my son has been part of the ABA treatment for that friend since playschool days. The treatment is very expensive, but (speaking anecdotally) it has made a world of difference for that boy. Without such provincial funding, there is no way the family could have afforded the treatment unless they chose to be homeless instead.

[Chris OFarrell]

Over in Australia, lotteries wins and so on are all tax exempt. I just never thought there were countries which TAXED that money, that just makes me blink.

[AMT]

Over in Australia, lotteries wins and so on are all tax exempt. I just never thought there were countries which TAXED that money, that just makes me blink.

Makes sense in America. Here, we only tax big amounts of money given to those who didn't have a lot in the first place.

[Stark]

Wow, the idea of Autism therapy having cost just blows my mind. Any such costs would have destroyed my family in the early 90s, and we wouldn't me middle class now. Damn, sucks that our taxes are so high I guess.

[JointStrikeFighter]

Wow, the idea of Autism therapy having cost just blows my mind. Any such costs would have destroyed my family in the early 90s, and we wouldn't me middle class now. Damn, sucks that our taxes are so high I guess.

Yeah man, 30-45 WHOLE PERCENT And it isnt like we get anything back is it? KEVIN RUDD IS STEALING MAH MONIES

[Crown]

There was a Sheriff from some place in Illinois on Radio 1 today. He is basically being taken to court by banks because he has refused to evict people from their homes for the banks. Correction, he's refusing to evict tenants from their rental property who have paid the rent on time for the past six months or so, but who's landlord has defaulted on their loan to the banks and had been receiving warnings from them but didn't say anything to their tenants.

Man, banks are just FULL of class aren't they?

[Stark]

Listen following up on their obligations and informing others would have lowered their share price buddy.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Major banks should be nationalized, generally speaking, and their executives banned from working for the federal government... Now, when all the propaganda is stripped away, we can see laid bare the sad truths of the capitalist system. I'll never forgive myself for how long I believed in it.

[Stark]

Not this again. It might make you feel powerful or outrageous to say these things (and not doubt you're using the LOL I WAS JOKING OBVIOUSLY emoticon) but other countries just regulate their banks and maintain strong central banks. America is just opposed to such, and there's a huge literature about exactly why it's bad and why the government can't be trusted and why the financiers will never let anything bad happen. Turns out the political environment in America is a result of this culture? It's not just a simplistic wand-waving exercise, but a result of more than a century of political discourse?

WHO KNEW.

[aerius]

Major banks should be nationalized, generally speaking, and their executives banned from working for the federal government... Now, when all the propaganda is stripped away, we can see laid bare the sad truths of the capitalist system. I'll never forgive myself for how long I believed in it.

Capitalism works fine as long as the system is well regulated and the rules are enforced. It becomes a problem when the industry gets in bed with the government and conspires to rob the people while the regulators turn a blind eye to it. Keep that shit from happening and capitalism works fine, if we actually enforced existing regulations as of say, 1995, all the big banks & financials would be bankrupt & gone right now and their executives serving 20 year terms in prison. There would be no bailouts and all those leechfucks would be in jail.

[Temjin]

Now check out the comments made by people posting in response to the article. Almost all of them are ranting that these people are idiots for not managing their finances properly. Because, you know, any responsible person with a factory job should be able to pay for autism therapy out of his own pocket.

I'm sure some of the right-wingers will be along any moment to explain that people like this need to pay more taxes, because they're underpaying right now.

I wouldn't expect people to claim anything else, especially with the housing crisis like it is now.

If they admit the system is flawed and that this can happen to anyone out there, they have to admit that it can happen to them. So instead, they immediately jump to the conclusion that it had to entirely be the family's fault, and by doing that they can assure themselves that it would never happen to them. They're smarter. They're more responsible. They wouldn't let something like that happen. They don't have to be scared.

It's the same reason women are more likely to place some of the blame on the female victim in rape cases. If they had to admit that it could happen to anyone, then they would have to admit it would happen to them. And that's just too inconceivable and scary.

[Alyeska]

If I remember correctly, give-away and gameshow prizes come with an enormous tax burden. This could be internet gossip, but I recall hearing of warehouses in SoCal filled with game show prizes that couldn't be claimed because people couldn't afford the taxes on them.

I hope there can be some sort of an effort to help these people. Nobody should be punished for trying to save their son.

Game winning are treated like ordinary income. So if you win say $100,000 and and you live in California you can expect a tax burden of $45,000 which would cover both federal and state taxes.

If you win a physical prize like a car or washer/dryer then the value of those items is treated like ordinary income. For some folks this means they'd have to sell it just to pay the taxes.

I feel bad for this family because it really doesn't seem like they did anything irresponsible. I am curious why they refinanced, but in the end it comes down to medical bills are crushing them, which is a nightmare too many Americans have to face.

Gets even better. People who catch famous baseballs usually have to sell them instantly because their assessed value is so high that it puts a huge tax burden on the individual. Even giving away the item doesn't count since you still have to pay taxes on gifts. On rare occasion congress passes a temporary exemption for one or two baseballs.

[apocolypse]

Over in Australia, lotteries wins and so on are all tax exempt. I just never thought there were countries which TAXED that money, that just makes me blink.

Maybe because I'm used to it, I just don't give it much thought. The lottery is income, and income is taxed. It's the circle of life.