Don’t the lady and the teacher actually have any other relatives? The amount is not astronomical, the equivalent is available. What exactly speaks against, for example, the former parents-in-law acting as guarantors?
Of course, that is also an option, but it surprises me that very often quite quickly (I mean this generally and not you!) people call on parents/in-laws to stand up for the young people's lives and even act as guarantors. In another thread, a similar idea recently came up with a user, where the original poster preferred the more convenient version of life for himself. Why should an older person take such a risk for their own life that they themselves did not cause? The young person is grown up and should always do what he decides for himself, but for that, he should also—just as the older person has to (or had to)—take responsibility and bear the consequences of his actions. He is an adult after all! Sorry, it often just happens too quickly for me... Mom and Dad are supposed to or can... as if they had no own life plans and dreams. It’s just a piece of paper, but a guarantee could, for the first time, end in misery for the older person. If something doesn’t work, then it just doesn’t work, and as an adult, I have to adapt my life to my possibilities. I can’t just put my parents’ wellbeing out on the market just so things become easier for me. Fewer and fewer people want to live in the house with their own parents, but at the same time, there is increasingly the convenient call for help to Mom and Dad. Something is not right about that for me; according to my understanding, it should rather be the other way around. I lived with my parents in the house I built myself; we received something and gave something, all of which was bindingly arranged to prevent surprises. The young people here "messed up," now they should see how they manage it on their own; there are plenty of ways, there are even two houses here. This is easily manageable without Mom + Dad.