Sarah, Duchess of York 9: November 2007-January 2008

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by Russophile

I think because Diana took a much more public role than Sarah did I think they all expected Sarah to just go away, that Diana received more. Also Prince Charles has his Duchy of Cornwall so he has a LOT more money than Andrew ever has had.

I think the main reason that Sarah got less was that she was the wife of the second son. In a system of primogeniture the first son gets the majority of the assets (like you said i.e., Duchy of Cornwall) while the rest get peanuts. Andrew's income has always been minuscule compared to Charles'.

The debts I think were a small part of the equation. The Queen may have been irritated by them but she wasn't really inconvenienced by them either.

[judith14011]

From an April 1997 promo for a (then) upcoming interview w/Sarah:

'I'm not going back to Andrew - I'd like to start dating'.
'I don't know where the money went - It just went. I don't even like shopping'.
'I don't want to be commercial but I have to be'.
'I find every day very, very difficult'.
How she prefers the likes of Marks & Spencer and Levis to designer clothing.
How she has to continue working to clear her debts and settle a major tax bill.

A NY TIMES article about how the queen did not bail Sarah out of her debts:
CHRONICLE - New York Times

[Russophile]

Originally Posted by judith14011

From an April 1997 promo for a (then) upcoming interview w/Sarah:

'I'm not going back to Andrew - I'd like to start dating'.
'I don't know where the money went - It just went. I don't even like shopping'.
'I don't want to be commercial but I have to be'.
'I find every day very, very difficult'.
How she prefers the likes of Marks & Spencer and Levis to designer clothing.
How she has to continue working to clear her debts and settle a major tax bill.

A NY TIMES article about how the queen did not bail Sarah out of her debts:
CHRONICLE - New York Times

I've said it before: Sarah's a Libra, if this doesn't demonstrate the scales tipping back and forth, I don't know what does!!

[Skydragon]

Sarah Ferguson turned back the clock as she revisited her eighties fashion past in London last night.

The Duchess of York, 48, flashed her legs in daring black opaque patterned tights with a rose motif

Back to the eighties: Fergie revisits her fashion past with racy patterned tights | the Daily Mail

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by selrahc4

I can't see any reason the the Duke of York needs to share any profit out of the supposed 15 million pounds with his ex-wife. According to some articles the home was owned by the Queen until 2000 when she signed it over to Andrew, well after the divorce. I can't see that Sarah would have any claim on a gift to Andrew from his mother at that stage. That is, if the transfer of ownership is true anyway. I always thought it was owned by the Crown Estates.

The party was held at a £10m home the Queen gave Prince Andrew and his former wife Sarah Ferguson as a wedding gift in 1986.
Princess In 'Boozy Birthday Rave' |Sky News|UK News
Sunninghill Park, near Ascot, was a wedding present from the Queen in 1986.
Airmiles Andy racks up £100,000 private jet bill for taxpayers (after selling his house for £15 million) | the Daily Mail
The 12-bedroom home, which is located just on the outskirts of Windsor Great Park, was given to the former couple as a wedding gift
Last Transaction Hero - Forbes.com
Sunninghill Park - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Sarah Ferguson turned back the clock as she revisited her eighties fashion past in London last night.

The Duchess of York, 48, flashed her legs in daring black opaque patterned tights with a rose motif

Back to the eighties: Fergie revisits her fashion past with racy patterned tights | the Daily Mail

From that article:
Those were the days: The Duchess was renowned for her elegant fashion taste in the 1980s"


Then just have a look at the pictures...

[ysbel]

I think its fair to say that despite the claims by the newspapers that the couple didn't have joint ownership of the house. If they had, Sarah would have gotten half the proceeds from the sale.

That's not that unusual. My parents left a house to my brother - not to my brother and his wife.

Also Sarah mentioned that when she moved back to Sunninghill after the divorce, it was hardly a cushy situation; she was in the maid's quarters. If I had had half ownership of a house, there would be no way that I would stay in the maid's quarters.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by ysbel

I think its fair to say that despite the claims by the newspapers that the couple didn't have joint ownership of the house. If they had, Sarah would have gotten half the proceeds from the sale.

That's not that unusual. My parents left a house to my brother - not to my brother and his wife.

Also Sarah mentioned that when she moved back to Sunninghill after the divorce, it was hardly a cushy situation; she was in the maid's quarters. If I had had half ownership of a house, there would be no way that I would stay in the maid's quarters.

No it is not unusual for the house to be given on the occasion of a marriage, but with an understanding that as it was a gift from his parents, in the event of adultery she would not have a claim on it. The marriage and divorce were before equal rights for women and it would probably have just been his name on the deeds.

It is also possible that when discussing the divorce settlement, she signed the property over as she would not be able to afford the upkeep, especially as she was already in serious debt.

[selrahc4]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

No it is not unusual for the house to be given on the occasion of a marriage, but with an understanding that as it was a gift from his parents, in the event of adultery she would not have a claim on it. The marriage and divorce were before equal rights for women and it would probably have just been his name on the deeds.

It is also possible that when discussing the divorce settlement, she signed the property over as she would not be able to afford the upkeep, especially as she was already in serious debt.

I see that the Wikipedia link states that the house was built on land purchased for the Queen from the Crown Estate. That must be the connection I had in mind before about the Crown Estate owning it.

According to this article in regard to the property "The Queen retained ownership until 2000, four years after the Yorks divorced, when she signed it over to Andrew."
Link to Article

[Russophile]

Originally Posted by selrahc4

I see that the Wikipedia link states that the house was built on land purchased for the Queen from the Crown Estate. That must be the connection I had in mind before about the Crown Estate owning it.

According to this article in regard to the property "The Queen retained ownership until 2000, four years after the Yorks divorced, when she signed it over to Andrew."
Link to Article

Aha! That's what I was thinking when I wrote what I wrote!

[Russophile]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Sarah Ferguson turned back the clock as she revisited her eighties fashion past in London last night.

The Duchess of York, 48, flashed her legs in daring black opaque patterned tights with a rose motif

Back to the eighties: Fergie revisits her fashion past with racy patterned tights | the Daily Mail

MY EYES!! MY EYES!!!

[jcbcode99]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Sarah Ferguson turned back the clock as she revisited her eighties fashion past in London last night.

The Duchess of York, 48, flashed her legs in daring black opaque patterned tights with a rose motif

Back to the eighties: Fergie revisits her fashion past with racy patterned tights | the Daily Mail

Oh Skydragon--what a hoot! I love the photos of Sarah from the 80's in the fruit hat, the polka dot dress, etc...with the caption below saying that the DUchess was known for her elegant taste! Such sarcasm!
I will say though, that Sarah has "come a long way, baby" since then, but I stand by a previous post where I suggested that perhaps Sarah had found a sale on ugly patterned stockings--I think these are the worst.

[Roslyn]

Yikes! That was a mistake.

One day she'll surprise us all. She'll appear at an evening event dressed really elegantly, with a nicely cut dress of an appropriate length, not too tight or low cut but still showing off her nice shape, with tasteful accessories and and wearing ordinary stockings and standing up straight, and with her hair worn up in a French roll or something else chic.

[Russophile]

I'm not going to hold my breath and would somebody turn "TAINTED LOVE" off???
Whaddareyou? Stuck in the '80's???

[Madame Royale]

Actually, I think that's why Sarah was "shuved" out of the fold...no one wanted to be seen beside the travelling circus that was the Duchess of York...

I mean, the woman even made a tiata look bad! How on EARTH can anyone make a tiara look bad?.lol. I don't know, but she did it!

I respect her, quite a lot, and think she's no doubt a top lady, but she has no idea!!!

[Madame Royale]

Come to think of it, did anyone feel oblliged to tell her that It's A Royal Knock Out wasn't an ongoing series?...

[jcbcode99]

Oh, she really made a tiara look bad (well, except on her wedding day--she looked lovelyl)--but who can forget that hideous Southern-belle purple gown she wore with the tiara--I mean,SHUDDER SHUDDER. I was embarassed for her. To illustrate my point:
http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums...6&d=1050009510 I mean, really, even Andrew is looking pretty embarassed!

[Russophile]