The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #61  
Old 02-17-2007, 08:21 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tallahassee, United States
Posts: 9
Interesting

I was very surprised to read that Diana bancrupted Charles. Since the info came directly from Charles' financial advisor, it must be true. I wonder if Camilla signed a postnup.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine
As The Prince of Wales Charles only has the income of the duchy of Cornwall - the duchy's possessions are basically tied up in a trust, of which he is the trustee and has a right to all the winnings. Charles spends the winnings by paying for his and his immediate family's upkeep, giving money to charities or organizing events for his charities and by reinvesting the money into the duchy in order to secure the trust for the future heir to the throne.
He does not have his own wealth in terms of having savings or personal investments. He does not need to think this way, so why should he?

Edit: Just read the afore mentioned article and it seems he has managed to keep the trust fund of the duchy not only stable but to make enough money out of it to put a bit of as a personal fortune aside.

And I read, too, that his mother lent him part of the money Diana asked for. The queen, after all, possesses the personal wealth of the souverain and has money she can spent the way she likes beyond the trust funds of the duchy of Lancaster.

I'm not so sure though that Charles minded the money too much as he knew Diana then for quite some time and knew that she was not the one to get into debts easily. While she had been quite expensive in the first years of their marriage she had managed quite well to stick to the money she had inherited from her father's side and had lived within her income (or so I read in the books about the princess). Thus Charles could be pretty sure that most of the money would end up with his own heirs anyway one day - I don't think the chance was very big that Diana would not only marry again but become a mother again. She had reached a certain age and a certain position where returning to the confines of motherhood was probably not really attractive for a mother of two wonderful boys. (That's mere speculation, of course, but then there is a plausibility Charles thought about things like that). And it is usus in the aristocracy from which Diana derived to think foremost of family when it comes to will personal wealth to somebody.

So I guess it was not that big deal for Charles even though it hurts, of course.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 02-17-2007, 08:24 PM
Henri M.'s Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Eindhoven / Maastricht, Netherlands
Posts: 1,896
I'm not aware about British custom, but on the Continent the standard marriage-on-conditions is:
a) the properties of the husband before the marriage
b) the properties of the wife before the marriage
c) the properties of husband and wife together, acquired during the marriage

In most agreements only c needs to be divided equally between husband and wife.
a) Prince William possesses 25.000.000,-- in private
b) Kate Middleton possesses nothing in private
c) William & Kate acquire 8.000.000,-- during marriage

If they are married on conditions, a and b will return to William respectively to Kate.
C needs to be divided between the two.
So Kate will get 4.000.000,--
And William will get 29.000.000,--
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 02-17-2007, 08:43 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: newyork, United States
Posts: 479
I think I read that there was no prenup between charles and camilla. But I don't think they would need one as I don't think they would divorce no matter what happened.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 02-17-2007, 10:02 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,495
I have read the same thing.

But as I have pointed out the pre-nup has no legal standing in Britian so why go through it if it won't necessarily be enforced anyway?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 02-18-2007, 03:52 AM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,410
The material in the Dutch archives and other similar documents are more correctly known as 'marriage contracts', and should not be confused with the modern pre-nup.
__________________
Seeking information? Check out the extensive Royal A-Z
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 02-18-2007, 07:28 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elizabeth Harris
I was very surprised to read that Diana bancrupted Charles. Since the info came directly from Charles' financial advisor, it must be true. I wonder if Camilla signed a postnup.
Do you have a link to this, as I can find nothing in my searches to suggest that Charles ever filed for bancruptcy or came close to it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 02-18-2007, 07:41 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henri M.
I'm not aware about British custom, but on the Continent the standard marriage-on-conditions is:
a) the properties of the husband before the marriage
b) the properties of the wife before the marriage
c) the properties of husband and wife together, acquired during the marriage

In most agreements only c needs to be divided equally between husband and wife.
a) Prince William possesses 25.000.000,-- in private
b) Kate Middleton possesses nothing in private
c) William & Kate acquire 8.000.000,-- during marriage

In most cases here in the UK, that would not apply. When agreeing a settlement, the judge has to take into account not just what each had, but if by the other being there, they were able to keep it.

i.e. The man owns a £500,000 house before they marry. The woman brings no money to the marriage, but pays towards the upkeep of the house. She gives up her right to be in employment to have his children, but continues to support him by encouraging him, accompanying him to events etc.
In this case she would be entitled to renumeration and a share in the property.

Prenups are still not recognised here as far as I know.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 02-28-2007, 02:33 AM
HRH Kimetha's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Arlington, United States
Posts: 778
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg
...William and Harry are very wealthy, but most of their inheritance came from The Queen's pocket when Diana received her divorce settlement.
I was under the assumption that Prince Charles was the one who paid out the monies to Diana and not the Queen.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine
As The Prince of Wales Charles only has the income of the duchy of Cornwall ...He does not have his own wealth in terms of having savings or personal investments. He does not need to think this way, so why should he?
I don't understand why Charles hasn't invested in a savings or checking account above his portfolio. Doesn't he have a 401 or CD's in this modern age of financial management? Does any of the royals have any of these? I am somewhat taken back that savings/checking accounts are not considered smart in putting money aside for a 'rainy day'. Perhaps one day, the monarchy could become taken over by the anti-monarchists and put out to pasture and forced to leave behind the Duchies. When that is done, where would they get their money to live on? No savings/checking/401/CD's I don't believe is a good idea.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 02-28-2007, 07:39 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRH Kimetha
When that is done, where would they get their money to live on? No savings/checking/401/CD's I don't believe is a good idea.
As far as I know, all the royals have accounts at Coutts & Co.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 02-28-2007, 07:48 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: newyork, United States
Posts: 479
I would think he does have checking accounts and investments. They may not be talked about though.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 06-28-2007, 04:34 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
The Queen is due to publish her annual public accounts revealing how taxpayers' money is spent by members of the Royal Family

BBC NEWS | UK | Queen to reveal royal spending

Royals cost each taxpayer 62p

The Queen and the Royal Family cost the taxpayer 62p per person last year - the same as the previous financial year, Buckingham Palace accounts have revealed

Royals cost each taxpayer 62p - Yahoo! News UK

Queen wants £1m for repairs as Buckingham Palace 'starts to crumble'

The Queen is asking for an extra £1 million a year to make Buckingham Palace and other historic royal buildings safe.

Queen wants £1m for repairs as Buckingham Palace 'starts to crumble' | News | This is London

- - - - - - -
Sorry ma'am, I think you should pay.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 06-28-2007, 06:04 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
The Queen is due to publish her annual public accounts revealing how taxpayers' money is spent by members of the Royal Family

BBC NEWS | UK | Queen to reveal royal spending

Royals cost each taxpayer 62p

The Queen and the Royal Family cost the taxpayer 62p per person last year - the same as the previous financial year, Buckingham Palace accounts have revealed

Royals cost each taxpayer 62p - Yahoo! News UK

Queen wants £1m for repairs as Buckingham Palace 'starts to crumble'

The Queen is asking for an extra £1 million a year to make Buckingham Palace and other historic royal buildings safe.

Queen wants £1m for repairs as Buckingham Palace 'starts to crumble' | News | This is London

- - - - - - -
Sorry ma'am, I think you should pay.

Sorry - can't agree with regard to BP. She doesn't own it. The repairs should be paid by the people who own it - the British taxpayers. The same with ALL the royal properties except Balmoral and Sandringham (plus the homes of the children of course).

Just because she lives there she doesn't own it. When I was living in a property owned by someone else and it needed repairs I didn't have to pay for it - they did. The same with BP and Windsor. If the parliament refuses to pay then they should state that the monarch really is the owner and make it clear that the parliament doesn't own these homes anymore.

You can't have it both ways - own something and then expect someone else to pay for its upkeep. If you own it you are responsible for its maintenance and repairs not the people you let live in it or use it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 06-28-2007, 06:07 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
Why can't people leave the Queen alone? She's such a lovely lady. Who cares who pays what? She's served us well, what's the big issue?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 06-29-2007, 06:01 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrissy57 View Post
Sorry - can't agree with regard to BP. She doesn't own it. The repairs should be paid by the people who own it - the British taxpayers. The same with ALL the royal properties except Balmoral and Sandringham (plus the homes of the children of course).
If it and they were available to ordinary people, I could accept your argument, but we seem to pay for decor to whichever royals taste and upkeep of the properties anyway. Perhaps it is time to employ properly qualified staff that can deal with these things as they happen, not when the cost is likely to be (by some accounts) 3m.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeatrixFan
Why can't people leave the Queen alone? She's such a lovely lady. Who cares who pays what? She's served us well, what's the big issue?
The big issue is asking for an extra million, on top of what the British taxpayer already pays for the upkeep of all these buildings. I find it somewhat insensitive when 1000's have lost their homes and all their goods due to the floods, that the queens advisors would even consider asking for another massive handout. Still, I suppose HM is unable to offer any financial aid for the upkeep of any of her 'homes', she must be down to her last million or 10!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 06-29-2007, 07:30 AM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,410
Does the Prime Minister pay the maintenace and refurbishment costs of Number 10 and Chequers from his or her own pocket? Without taking the argument to ridiculous lengths, more people have access to Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle than have access to the homes in Downing Street.
__________________
Seeking information? Check out the extensive Royal A-Z
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 06-29-2007, 07:42 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
True, but we already pay for the upkeep of all the royal buildings and proper forward planning should have avoided excessive extra amounts needed. Instead of redecorating for the nth time, shore up the facades!

The other thing to consider is that the occupants of No. 10 and 11 are voted in and while the PM and his minions may make a lot of money from their time in Downing Street, (they do pay tax on it), it pales into insignificance compared to HM's non taxable income.

Buckingham Palace is falling down - Yahoo! India News
The Queen receives 15 million pounds a year from the Department of Culture, Media and Sport, to pay for the maintenence of the Occupied Royal palaces.
The Queen's plea came as her annual financial report revealed she cost the taxpayer 37.3 million pounds last year

It is actually an extra million per year!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 06-29-2007, 09:25 PM
WindsorIII's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tucson, United States
Posts: 406
This article covers more about the costs of Buckingham Palace, taxpayers, etc but also says that the most expensive one in the Royal Family is Prince Charles.

Did he really spend 2.9 million on travel expenses alone? What does the Queen spend?

Buckingham Palace crumbling as repair funds dry up

From correspondents in London
June 30, 2007 02:00am
Buckingham Palace crumbling as repair funds dry up | NEWS.com.au
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 06-30-2007, 06:00 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by WindsorIII View Post
This article covers more about the costs of Buckingham Palace, taxpayers, etc but also says that the most expensive one in the Royal Family is Prince Charles.
Thanks for the article. The difference is, to me, that Charles does contribute from his own pocket. The Clarence House restoration cost a total of 6m, but Charles did pay 1.5m towards the cost. He also earns money by careful investment of what he was given and pays tax.

If HM had said she needs an extra million per year and she intends to contribute half a million per year herself from her private funds, it wouldn't have seemed so bad.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 06-30-2007, 01:39 PM
BMC's Avatar
BMC BMC is offline
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
The Queen is due to publish her annual public accounts revealing how taxpayers' money is spent by members of the Royal Family
BBC NEWS | UK | Queen to reveal royal spending
Royals cost each taxpayer 62p
The Queen and the Royal Family cost the taxpayer 62p per person last year - the same as the previous financial year, Buckingham Palace accounts have revealed
Royals cost each taxpayer 62p - Yahoo! News UK
Queen wants £1m for repairs as Buckingham Palace 'starts to crumble'
The Queen is asking for an extra £1 million a year to make Buckingham Palace and other historic royal buildings safe.
Queen wants £1m for repairs as Buckingham Palace 'starts to crumble' | News | This is London- - - - - - -
Sorry ma'am, I think you should pay.
HM is worth every cent. In fact I would say she is great value for the money!

I disagree about her paying for the repairs at BP. The Palace is provided as a resident for the Monarch by the Government. Therefore the Government should pay for maintenance & repairs whenever necessary, like any good landlord should.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 07-01-2007, 04:36 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by BMC View Post
HM is worth every cent. In fact I would say she is great value for the money!

I disagree about her paying for the repairs at BP. The Palace is provided as a resident for the Monarch by the Government. Therefore the Government should pay for maintenance & repairs whenever necessary, like any good landlord should.
It is not the government that ends up paying, it is the poor old British taxpayer. The country are not her landlords, tenants pay rent which helps with repairs, HM lives rent and tax free!
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british royal family, civil list, finances


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wealth and Finances of the Spanish Royal Family hrhcp Royal Family of Spain 109 02-06-2014 06:00 AM
Costs and Finances of the Belgian Royal Family Marengo Royal Family of Belgium 64 07-27-2013 05:49 AM
Royals and Wealth, Costs and Finances kcc Royal Life and Lifestyle 384 09-28-2012 02:27 AM
Wealth of The German Royal/Princely Houses kcc Royal Families of Germany and Austria 12 12-30-2007 04:35 AM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit current events fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jewellery jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king constantine ii king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg nobility olympic games olympics ottoman picture of the month poland pom president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince felipe prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess letizia princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:28 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]