Options for Sarah to recover from the 'Cash for Access' scandal


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
In either the Mail or Telegraph, I can't remember which, it was stated that after leaving the Queen's holiday cruise, Beatrice and Eugenie will join their mother for a vacation in Spain. Sarah can't be too concerned with all her money problems and such.
 
Andrew and Sarah may care for each other, but Sarah has a funny way of showing how she cares. Andrew's caring is probably stretched to the limit by now.
 
They share unbreakable bonds - two daughters. I think it a credit to both of their parenting skills that the princesses are on excellent terms with them and each other and have remarked in the past how lucky they feel that their parents are so close.

I'm old enough to recall how much ordure the Duchess bore when she married - nasty press about her weight, constant comparison with Diana, criticism of her every move and comment, seeming persecution from courtiers who didn't approve of her...it was never ending.

As I've claimed above, many people who are experienced in the way of the world and press are pleased to still call Fergie their friend. This alone speaks volume to me.

Nor do I forget that before the long knives came out for Fergie, she was a great favourite with the Queen.
 
As she was with Prince Philip. However! Many affairs, many gaffes, and many bills later, Sarah is still in the Twilight Zone on the Titanic doomed to repeat the same mistakes time and again, and again, and again, and again. . et. cetera. . .. . .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Katrianna said:
In either the Mail or Telegraph, I can't remember which, it was stated that after leaving the Queen's holiday cruise, Beatrice and Eugenie will join their mother for a vacation in Spain. Sarah can't be too concerned with all her money problems and such.
Click to expand...

The Daily Mail says
Beatrice and Eugenie are heading for Sotogrande in southern Spain to join their mother in a friend’s villa. It’s their fourth trip this summer. So far.
Click to expand...

Noithing about Andrew though. :)
 
@NotAPretender: you got me wrong. It was only a friendly advice. The people you are talking about all the time, you don't know them personally. You're talking about sources. Sources? How do you know that these sources aren't pure speculation as well? :ermm:

In general I find it a bit tacky that this seems to be a steady hobby to some people - to badmouth about the private lives of strangers.
 
Sources are the only thing we have to go on, we don't know Sarah, Andrew or the girls personally and if we did I doubt any of us would ever talk about their personal lives on here.

We are expressing our opinions about people, posters might have negative opinions about Sarah and it is their right to express them.

This forum is dedicated to talking about the royalty of the world, I adore this forum and it is a hobby for me.
 
Russophile said:
As she was with Prince Philip. However! Many affairs, many gaffes, and many bills later, Sarah is still in the Twilight Zone on the Titanic doomed to repeat the same mistakes time and again, and again, and again, and again. . et. cetera. . .. . .
Click to expand...

Yes - much whiskey under the bridge.
 
fergalicious said:
The people you are talking about all the time, you don't know them personally...
Click to expand...

And....neither do you.

Sources or opinions - that's the lingua franca here. Not strolling in and ordering established posting parties that they must trust you, take your word for "it" that they/we are wrong.

Not buying what you are selling, m'dear.

My opinion about Sarah has gone from enthusiastic admiration during their courtship and marriage, to dismayed observation during her many escapades which ranged from tacky to promiscuous, to a modicum of respect as she hauled herself out of debt, and now to a rueful realization that she's not anything that can be molded into anything resembling a whole adult.

The thread's topic is "what can she do to recover from this." The answer in my estimation is to place herself under the guidance and regulation of an entity that will act in her best interest even when she wheedles, cries and tantrums for something that is not.

I read the article on Susan Boyle a few days ago, and the very tight monetary controls placed on her. They sounded like an excellent model to use here. The only person whinging about the financial controls on Ms. Boyle was her brother, who I speculate might not have been whinging on Ms. Boyle's behalf, but in frustration that his own interests were thwarted.

Liquored up or not, Sarah's judgement is impaired on almost every count.

To recover from this latest debacle, Sarah has to submit to financial and personal guardianship.

Those who seek to excuse her by blaming it on her past are actually reinforcing that Sarah lacks the decision making process that would allow her to grow beyond her limitations. She can't, she won't, and she doesn't want to.
 
Iluvbertie said:
Who stole stuff? I haven't heard of anyone being charged with theft. What have I missed?
Click to expand...

Taking without paying is stealing. If it's "theft of services," like hiring a portrait painter then never paying, it's stealing their services and intellectual property. If you have food and liquor delivered and never pay for it, it's stealing.

It's not pocketing the silver spoons from the sideboard, but it's stealing.

IMO, what Sarah has done is no better than common theft. In fact, it's worse: it's not like she was stealing a quart of milk to feed her starving babies. She's stealing to keep up appearances. A low-rent Bernie Madoff, if you will.

bertie, I know you think the world of her and I'm not posting this as a jab at you. I just think that what she has done is reprehensible. Whatever the excuse is, the bottom line is that she took without paying. Repeatedly. To the tune of millions. And that's stealing. That's theft.
 
Last edited:
Succinct and to the point, Madame! :notworthy:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I whole-heartedly agree NaP. However! Sarah, being Sarah, will she stick to a plan? She always starts a project/plan gung-ho then reverts. That is the crux of the matter and which Russo will be monitoring.
 
Stealing is when there is 'no intent' to pay not that circumstances have changed and you are unable to pay. Sarah didn't do these things with 'no intent' to pay. She had every intention of paying but circumstances changed - her business deals went sour with the GFC and so she now is unable to pay but that isn't theft.

She is in debt through bad decisions and bad luck (sorry but when a company in which you have invested and was showing a profit before the GFC and then it goes bankrupt because of that that is bad luck) but that doesn't mean that she never intended on paying these debts.

They are millions of people who are the same circumstances as Sarah that aren't thieves but people whose luck and financial circumstances have changed and now they have to either write off their debts and leave businesses out of pocket or make other arrangements to pay the debts (such as take 10 years to pay 1 years school fees which is happening at my school).

You, I assume, can prove that Sarah had 'no intention' of paying these businesses because I have seen no evidence that she had no intention but more that she intended on paying but now doesn't have the means to pay - that isn't theft but debt.

Theft is a clearly defined criminal offence. Sarah hasn't been charged with theft because the authorities don't regard her actions as theft but as bad debt because there is every evidence that Sarah intended on paying, but at the moment can't do so.

She is a bad money manager no doubt but a thief - no.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So when was she going to stop running up her bills, when was going to be the right time to start paying.

e.g. Personal Trainer $65,000, I hope there was no use of royal connections to run up this 'tab'
 
Last edited:
She could always go and use the local gym in Windsor for c£50 a month!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It isn't a matter of 'when' she was going to pay but the need to prove that she never intended on paying. That has never even been suggested.

That she was a bad money manager was acknowledged by me but she isn't a thief unless you can prove that she intended on not paying the bills, as opposed to intended on paying but found that as time went along she was unable to pay e.g. she might have paid her personal trainer for a number of sessions so he/she knew that she would pay but then was unable to pay for awhile but the personal trainer, knowing that he/she would be paid at some point continued providing a service. Afterall if the personal trainer didn't expect to get paid why would he/she continue to provide the service - the very fact that the personal trainer continue to train with her even when not being paid clearly indicates that the personal trainer expected to get paid or else they would have stopped giving the service e.g. my lawnmower man knows that I will pay him when I see him so he leaves a bill for me each time he does the lawn. When I see him I pay him what I owe him (and usually a bit more because he mightn't have been paid for a couple of months). He knows that he will get paid so he continues to provide the service. If he believed that I wasn't going to pay him he would stop mowing my lawn and seek legal redress for the outstanding amount. The Personal Trainer, and others, were the same - expected to get paid and so continued to provide a service even though there was a large debt growing. That is not theft under any definition as there was a clear intent to pay but circumstances have changed and she is now unable to pay (she may even declare herself bankrupt and then they will get nothing but holding the debt and helping her get on her feet again - as she has done before - will see them get paid).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Most people who owe a great deal of money, or even a little, do not keep running up bills because they know very well they can´t pay. Once again you are conveniently forgetting the poor people who are owed who do not have any soft touches to fall back on.
Just one little question, where do you buy your rose coloured glasses?
 
Wisteria said:
Most people who owe a great deal of money, or even a little, do not keep running up bills because they know very well they can´t pay.
Click to expand...

You're kidding aren't you? Never heard of credit card debt where people pay off minimum amounts each month but still keeping running up their debt. Or student loan debts where students take ever increasing loans to finance their schooling or lifestyles. There are people in the world so heavily in debt that they will never clear that debt in their lifetimes. I've worked with people from the US who have such high college debt that they acknowledge it will probably never be paid off. But they continue to spend on their credit cards, take out loans for other items.

According to newspaper reports all of Sarah's debts in the UK have been paid, she doesn't owe a personal trainer anything. Within the US it's another matter.
 
You are joking too I suppose or you have the address of the rose coloured glasses firm.
Student debts? To owe the royal postal service thousands of pounds? From your source do you know who the soft touch was that paid off the debts? I imagine the Queen or ex husband as she, herself, said, even though she was "drunk" her state of monetary affairs.
By the way I don´t approve of credit card debt, someone isn´t being paid that is for sure and they have my pity not the person running up the bills.
 
Iluvbertie said:
That is not theft under any definition as there was a clear intent to pay but circumstances have changed and she is now unable to pay (she may even declare herself bankrupt and then they will get nothing but holding the debt and helping her get on her feet again - as she has done before - will see them get paid).
Click to expand...


I agree with you. As you point out she has dug herself out of a hole before so I don't think she will throw in the towel straight away, but obviously her earning potential isn't what is once was.

I no expert but I think a start would be for Sarah and/or Andrew's office literally go though every bill, start at home and deal with her Creditors in England first.

First step prioritise, who really needs to be paid NOW and really won't wait. Try and clear any particularly embarassing debts straight away. Hopefully the funds are there somewhere to deal with those.

After that I think communication is the key.
Contact literally everyone, see who may be prepared to wait (maybe Sarah has helped them in the past or maybe they are simply loaded and don't want to kick someone when they are down).

Next see who would be prepared to put some sort of repayment plan in place.

I think she has taken out a personal loan to pay american creditors, and again communicate regularly with the bank.

Deal in some way with bills that come in from now on, at least make contact and let people know when they can expect to be paid.

I know it's very simplicitic and doesn't pay the bills, but my point is if debtors are contacted and don't feel they are being ignored at least this constant drip drip of damaging reports may stop making their way into the press.
 
Wisteria said:
Most people who owe a great deal of money, or even a little, do not keep running up bills because they know very well they can´t pay. Once again you are conveniently forgetting the poor people who are owed who do not have any soft touches to fall back on.
Just one little question, where do you buy your rose coloured glasses?
Click to expand...


The 'poor people who are owed' are also bad business people as they continued to supply goods and services without getting paid. Had they believed that they wouldn't get paid they would have stopped supplying the goods and services (if they were good business people).

I don't buy rose coloured glasses. I live in the real world where most people have debts and many people do run up large debts on a regular basis with the full knowledge that they will probably take years to pay off a small sum while they add to the debt. That is extremely common in capitalist societies where people have to have the most up to date stuff but don't have the means to buy it so they put it on credit or time payments and pay a small amount but the debt continues to grow as they are only attacking a small part each time and not even covering the interest payments.

Sarah has been a bad money manager but so have the people who have allowed these debts to accrue. What business person in their right mind allows a debt to reach 65,000 without some payment being made - not a good one.

Sarah isn't the only one at fault her but so are the people who are owed as they allowed her the credit and allowed it to continue without some payment it seems.

I have no sympathy for any business that is owed large sums from anyone as they should stop providing any further goods and services until payment is made. Unfortunately in our modern society this isn't the accepted way of doing business any more but rather let people run up big debts in order to say 'I serve so-and-so'.
 
What a sad state of affairs, these days it seems to be the fashion to blame the victims.
I think it is only natural that someone called Duchess of York, the ex wife of a member of the royal family asks for credit then as the BRF has always been seen as the epitome of integrity since the days of Queen Victoria, I just can´t imagine anyone refusing it.
Thank goodness there are still people about who try to curb their spending and try not to owe money to anyone. Unfortunately most of Sarah´s success has been due to her being an ex member of the royal family and I seriously doubt she will be able to peddle influences again as with this scandal everyone knows that it will lead to nowhere. I still think she should try and get a position as a talker, but then she could just live within her means as an ordinary person and be thankful she has some help with her financial tangle from her ex husband. He is sympathetic now, he has been sympathetic in the past but what will happen if he marries again? I can´t see any woman putting up with an ex wife being dependent for living quarters (or has she really moved out).
She started her life out as Miss S. Ferguson, she was a royal duchess by marriage, but now she is divorced she should go back to her beginnings, a well born, well connected subject of her majesty.
 
Wisteria said:
She started her life out as Miss S. Ferguson, she was a royal duchess by marriage, but now she is divorced she should go back to her beginnings, a well born, well connected subject of her majesty.
Click to expand...

So so true.
Incredible good line. :)
 
Just to be the devil's advocate here, yes, there are people who keep deferring their student loans (God only knows why they get like 2% interest, pay them off!) and there are plenty of those making minimum payments. However! If you make the minimum payment on your credit card, no more credit is extended to you. Russo found out that she paid a couple of them off and BINGO! Credit limit was raised and there was encouragement from the vendors to spend.
I wonder if those extending credit to Sarah are afraid? She still has considerable pull with PA. Would she say something like "I'm going to tell my daughters and ex husband you're a terrible business if you do not extend credit to me?"
Makes me wonder. . .
 
Iluvbertie said:
Theft is a clearly defined criminal offence. Sarah hasn't been charged with theft because the authorities don't regard her actions as theft but as bad debt because there is every evidence that Sarah intended on paying, but at the moment can't do so.

She is a bad money manager no doubt but a thief - no.
Click to expand...

Simply because someone has not been charged with a crime does not mean that they are not guilty of the offense.

"Bad luck" is not running up a bill with a trainer that you know damned well you can't pay, because you have been looting your employees for day to day expenses. That's intent. She knew how deeply she was in trouble else she would not have pimped Andrew out for half a mil.

She knew she was broke and she kept on spending, kept on looting.

Charged with a crime or not, that's theft. She stole. And she's not sorry that she did, just that she got caught.
 
My goodness NaP! You are quite on your game today! :notworthy: I heartily agree with every word you wrote.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just for the record, I have a great deal of respect for bertie, and she and I have conversed in PMs. We just disagree quite strongly on the issue of Sarah. I know bertie's admiration for Sarah but I find Sarah's behaviour inexcusable.

However, I thoroughly enjoy bertie's thought process and clear writing.

And yes, I think Sarah is a thief. Add that to her past adultery and I have a picture of a person who has taken much more that she has earned: both in monetary and nonmonetary terms.

When/if Charles takes the throne, I can only imagine that her little bit of remaining sufferance will be up.
 
Last edited:
The very fact that she was borrowing from some people to pay debts indicates that she intended to pay so no it isn't theft at all but debt.

The trainer must have expected payment to allow her to run up the bill as well.

The fact that she tried to get some money also shows that she intended to pay her bills so again no theft. She tried a legal means to gain money again indicates that she was aware that she was in trouble but that she also knew that she had to get money legally to start paying off the debts.

She isn't a thief but a bad money manager.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I too have a lot of respect for you but must disagree as Sarah is not a thied unless you can prove no intention to pay - not no ability mind you but no intention to pay.

As Charles has had a better relationship with her than his father I wouldn't be a bit surprised if she is more accepted in the family when he is king than she is now with Philip's attitude.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom