First, you are wrong: taking a story at face value isn't making assumptions about it, it's literally the opposite. I'll make the correct argument for you, and say that a story can't possibly show everything that happens, and that the author may decide to gloss over some details at time.
My underlying point is that given what the author is showing us, there is NO reason to assume she is paying, because they don't behave as if she is (they never talk about money, they never talk about when she is going to get paid next, she never mentions doing something back for him, no mention of how long they might stay at most, he mentioned he'd be fine if she was tricking him, which implies he has something to lose from this arrangement, etc). Nothing that would be even tangentially related is brought up (food expenses, bills, chores, whatever). The only thing we have to assume she is paying him back is that "she is a decent person", which seems to be the case in the author's intentions, but that's still pretty damn weak. Him giving her the answer means little when he pretty much tells us he'd be fine with being tricked by her, we cannot expect him to behave rationally at all times.
The father MIGHT be irrelevant to the story, but the author chose to make these two have no contact for 17 years, during which she got a kid and now that she is in need the person is nowhere to be found. This is pretty important for the plot: if he is still around, for example, he might not be happy with his daughter living with a stranger and/or might be okay with hosting his ex-wife and his daughter for a while, and there are a bunch of other possibilities I hopefully don't need to list. I don't want a 20 pages essay on the life of this character, but I need to know why he isn't helping instead of the protagonist (and again I don't need the deepest, darkest secrets motivating them, it's enough to know if he is dead, if they had a falling out or whatever). It's much more reasonable to expect him to help over the protagonist, unless something went wrong, and since this is essential for the plot to unfold the way it does, I would expect it to be addressed at the early stages, all the more if it doesn't matter (just get it out of the way).
I am glad you see the comedy, but this to me seems anything but, outside of "Kyou is a klutz beyond belief" (which at times IS funny, I must admit).
You can't write a story where the characters both exist in a vacuum and also have these super intricate backstories to justify their current predicament but we can't possibly address or know about it unless it's convenient for the author. I mean, you CAN, but it's garbage. We don't even get a NOD to this stuff (the protagonist asking, her showing some reluctancy, and him dropping the subject for the moment), and that's bad.
If the starting point was more ordinary, there would be less need for scrutiny (honestly, them keeping contact instead of being strangers for 17 years would probably solve all issues), but the author created extraordinary circumstances, and treats this as both perfecty normal and really fucking weird at the same time, while tip-toeing around giving any definitive answers.
P.S.
I get that this exchange has gotten long, so if you want to we can just agree to disagree after this or your next reply, because I feel we'd start going in circles next.
. ...And the majority are agreeing with it.
