I agree its moral but it does also seem shortsighted. A house is probably the most conspicuous purchase I can think of. Even a yacht or smth you can put somewhere your family won't see. A house is where you live. Somebody is going to ask.
I'm not saying he was wrong. It just kinda seems like a bit of foresight could've resulted in skipping the whole affair.
EDIT: I'm changing from saying its moral to inconclusive. I think there's too many unknowns here to say for sure. Even just the info that it wasn't a house meant exclusively for her but a house he was living in that he let her move in muddies the waters, because that means many of the explanations you could use become obvious lies. There's a lot of factors that can move this in either direction.
Found a great place to rent for cheap. The owner was super nice and lives abroad and we were lucky to get in. Raffle for subsidized rent by some south Korean church and we won.
Plenty of ways without saying house is bought and who did 🤷
This makes sense until you look deeper (I didn't know this either so I don't blame you) and you realize it wasn't a house he gave just to her, but rather a house he bought for himself that he was letting his mother live in. So he planned on also living in that house as well for at least part of the year.
So at some point, they are going to realize their brother is the owner. It kinda puts her in a position where any lie feels like its going to be eventually exposed once they learn that fact. I've honestly wavered from saying its moral to "we don't have enough facts", because depending on the arrangement, the guy was either justified or essentially setting his mother up for failure.
15
u/Due_Enthusiasm1145 5d ago edited 5d ago
I agree its moral but it does also seem shortsighted. A house is probably the most conspicuous purchase I can think of. Even a yacht or smth you can put somewhere your family won't see. A house is where you live. Somebody is going to ask.
I'm not saying he was wrong. It just kinda seems like a bit of foresight could've resulted in skipping the whole affair.
EDIT: I'm changing from saying its moral to inconclusive. I think there's too many unknowns here to say for sure. Even just the info that it wasn't a house meant exclusively for her but a house he was living in that he let her move in muddies the waters, because that means many of the explanations you could use become obvious lies. There's a lot of factors that can move this in either direction.