1 month ago
21
In 1999, a promise was made. A brother, in front of a few relatives, declared that if his sister and her husband decided to settle in the new country where he lived, he would transfer one of his shops to her. Encouraged by this assurance, the couple made the big move, expecting to start a new life.
But that promise never materialized. Instead of receiving a shop, the husband was employed by his brother-in-law, working tirelessly for a meager salary that barely covered their living expenses. Despite this, they never complained. The low income forced them to live in a small back house on the brother-in-law's property, but they remained content, hoping things would get better.
In 2005, tensions rose. While still living in the back house, the brother-in-law wanted the family to move out but had no legitimate reason. One day, he created a confrontation, accusing them of something baseless, which led to a heated argument. The situation escalated, and the brother-in-law angrily demanded they leave. Left with no choice, the family packed up and moved out, marking the beginning of a strained relationship.
That same year, the brother-in-law approached the husband, insisting that he return to run one of his stores. The husband, ever dutiful, agreed and proposed paying for the store’s rent and stock fairly. However, the brother-in-law demanded an exorbitant amount, claiming the stock was worth R700,000. The husband, determined to fulfill his end of the agreement, paid the R700,000 in full through installments. But challenges continued, as the brother-in-law often took groceries and other stock without paying.
In 2008, the family was preparing to buy a home for themselves. Lacking the necessary collateral, they turned to the brother-in-law for help, asking him to take out a loan in his name so they could purchase the property. They assured him they would make every payment, which they did. Yet, the brother-in-law betrayed them once again. He used one of their deposits—over R100,000—to settle his own tax debt without their consent. Though the family paid the deposit again, they never saw reimbursement, and the property transfer they had hoped for still did not happen.
In the early 2010s, the family's struggles worsened. In 2014, a shocking incident deepened the mistrust. The brother-in-law ordered a shipment of untaxed tobacco and asked the husband to help unload it. Unaware of the legal implications, the husband agreed, only to be arrested when the police arrived. The brother-in-law lied about the situation, and the husband had to make regular court appearances, burdened by hefty legal fees.
In 2020, another opportunity arose: the property where the husband's store was located was up for sale. The brother-in-law, short on funds, proposed buying it together as partners. The siblings, witnessing this new partnership agreement, stood by as witnesses, hoping this would lead to a fair and prosperous arrangement. Despite initial hesitations, the husband trusted his brother-in-law and agreed.
For legal reasons, the husband put their 50% share under his son's name, while the brother-in-law did the same. The property agreement was signed by the husband's son and sent directly to the lawyer's office, but the family does not have proof of the agreement in their possession, as it was never sent to them. They paid their half, contributing R2,000,000—much more than the brother-in-law's R1,200,000. In return, the brother-in-law promised to cover the legal and transfer costs.
From 2020 onwards, the family faced new struggles. They spent over R700,000 repairing the deteriorating property and paid off municipal bills totaling over R100,000. Yet, the brother-in-law refused to contribute to these costs. Four years passed, and despite repeated inquiries, the property transfer remained "in progress." The husband's questions were met with empty reassurances.
Then, the truth emerged. The brother-in-law, with the help of a lawyer, had changed everything. He had put the entire property under his own name, without their knowledge. The family’s share had been stolen, and now, the brother-in-law demanded rent for the very store they thought they co-owned. The siblings, who had stood as witnesses to the partnership agreement, remained silent. They had no words for their sister, offering neither support nor objection. Their silence deepened the family's sense of isolation and betrayal.
The betrayals hit hard. After years of loyalty, trust, and hard work, the family faced a harsh reality. But despite the setbacks, they remain resilient, determined to seek justice. Though betrayed by blood, they hold onto hope that one day, the truth will prevail—even if only in God's eyes.
[link] [comments]
