Request Media Kit

Nadya Suleman (Octomom) and Children Face Eviction

Thirty-eight-year-old Octomum Nadya Suleman is no stranger to controversy. Suleman and her 14 children (10 boys and 4 girls) could be evicted from their house in Orange County, California, and just in...
Nadya Suleman (Octomom) and Children Face Eviction
Written by
  • Thirty-eight-year-old Octomum Nadya Suleman is no stranger to controversy. Suleman and her 14 children (10 boys and 4 girls) could be evicted from their house in Orange County, California, and just in time for Christmas. The house contains five bedrooms and three bathrooms, which sounds beyond adequate for the average family. However, reports claim that the children are pressed together in bunk beds inside a house that is quickly deteriorating.

    Fifty-three-year-old Lana El-Jor, who is Nadya’s landlady, claims that she has suffered financial distress because of the famous Octomom’s negligence as a tenant. “I have had problems refinancing the building myself because of her. That’s one of the things why we have to ask her to leave. The bank refused to support the loan. She is said to have left her houses abused and everything and it worried the bank.”

    Lana personally witnessed the living conditions when she stopped by the home one day while the 14 children were under the care of a nanny. “It was very messy. Let’s say they’re not as happy as my kids. Fourteen kids need a bigger backyard for sure. I saw they had four bunk beds. I think those were for the little ones, and they had beds in all the other rooms.”

    A neighbor echoed the sentiments of Lana. “The house is very rundown and that broken window looks dangerous. It must get cold inside at night. It seems that Octomom or the nanny rarely take the children out and most of them spend all day holed up in the house as if they’re in hiding. It doesn’t look like a happy existence,” the neighbor said.

    Octomom began the year being the center of ridicule. Suleman was investigated earlier in the year for welfare fraud. The Department of Welfare Fraud Prevention and Investigation researched the case when it was revealed that the television personality had earned $200,000 the previous year while she was still receiving benefits.

    [Image Via NDN]

    Get the WebProNews newsletter delivered to your inbox

    Get the free daily newsletter read by decision makers

    Subscribe
    Advertise with Us

    Ready to get started?

    Get our media kit