Questionable sentence with "were" Hi! I listened to an English lesson today, and in the lesson there was a sentence that is not completely clear to me. I copied it in context, but the questionable sentence is the second sentence in the text: "A “social secretary” is a person whose job it is to manage someone’s social appointments – where they go to lunch, the parties they attend, and so forth. Normally, only a very rich or important person would have a social secretary, someone who would handle things that were not related to the person’s business life, but to his or her personal life." So, I don't understand that in the second sentence, why "were" is used instead of "are"? I think that this sentence is not in past simple tense. I thought about whether it is conditional, because of the usage of "would have" and "would handle", but I think it isn't a conditional either. Which grammar is it? Do you happen to know? Thanks in advance!