Prince Andrew, Duke of York Current Events 7: February 2015

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Princess_Eleanor

The Kents and Gloucesters live at Kensington Palace and St James's Palace, those are also protected. Andrew could certainly have an apartment at one of the Palaces, just like the Kents and Gloucesters, and it would be protected, but it would be a lot smaller than Royal Lodge and that's not what he wants.

Now Charles might want him to move into Frogmore Cottage? He certainly won't like that either. But it won't be his choice as long as Charles is the one paying for his lifestyle.

The Kents etc don't NEED a really secure area. They live in KP because they have done so for years, but they could probably live safely enough in a house in the country or London. Andrew with his bad image with the public clearly needs a really secure area. We dont know if Charles is paying him an allowance, so he may not have any leverage. If he really wants to stay in RL, he will do so as he has a long lease and has put a lot of money into it himself. Andrew clearly does not want to live in KP or in London, he has probably more amusements to occupy him in Windsor such as riding.

[Curryong]

Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23

Endgame is to move William, Kate and their kids into Royal Lodge. I have believed this ever since they relocated to Windsor shortly before HMQ's passing.

What will be interesting is if Andrew refuses to budge, especially if Charles is not planning to reimburse the considerable $$ Andrew put into refurbishment of the place.

So William and Kate will have Anmer, the huge apartment at KP AND Royal Lodge. Rather an embarrassment of riches for one family one would think!

[Denville]

William is the future King If he can't have a few houses who can

[Mirabel]

Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23

Endgame is to move William, Kate and their kids into Royal Lodge. I have believed this ever since they relocated to Windsor shortly before HMQ's passing.

I don't see why William and his family can't move into Windsor Castle?
The Queen lived there happily for much of her life.

[Curryong]

Originally Posted by Denville

William is the future King If he can't have a few houses who can

Yes, and great PR for the monarchy in a country with homelessness on the increase and rising mortgage rates. The population will love it!

[Granada]

This makes no sense to me. None of it.
Andrew took out a lease and invested millions in renovations when he moved into Royal Lodge. Assuming it would be his for life, and one or both of his daughters could have access to it, after his death due to the longevity of the lease.
This was done with the full support of the Queen and Prince Philip.

That was the plan. Anne has the impressive Gatcombe Park Estate and Edward the equally impressive Bagshot Park.

Even if the reports are true, and Charles is pulling a 250 thousand pound sum that Andrew received from The Queen for maintenance on Royal Park, he I assumed, would have received millions upon her death. I'm assuming Prince Phillip left him something too.

On top of the ill gotten money from side deals with dodgy-shady despots and oligarchs that he used to pal around with. Like the oligarch that paid him 15 million pounds in 2007, 3 million OVER the asking price for the then decrepit Sunninghill Park. I bet he made lots of profitable side deals.

Maybe Charles isn't picking up his Security bills either. That Andrew feels he must have too. Who knows?
For The Royal Lodge Estate, 250 thousand pounds a year towards maintenance, to me wouldn't cover it. Salaries for staff, upkeep, ect.....keep in mind it even has its own Church ! Where Beatrice married, The Royal Chapel of All Saints.

Wouldn't The Queen have made her wishes known to Charles ? I'm sure Royal Lodge meant a lot to her. It was her childhood country home, when she was Princess Elizabeth of York too, prior to her Father becoming King.
I just don't understand this.
Must be lots more going on behind the scenes regarding Andrew that we are not aware of. Or the reports are false, and he isn't moving.

I'm certainly NOT an Andrew apologist either. I find him simply loathsome ! Arrogant, entitled and downright mean to People.
But I find this situation very curious.

I NEVER understood Frogmore Cottage for The Sussex's, now however I do. Because they never intended to stay, I now realize.

But to go from Royal Lodge Estate to Frogmore Cottage? It doesn't even have a pool for the grandkids, and compared to his siblings massive Grand Estates ? I find that baffling.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Curryong

Yes, and great PR for the monarchy in a country with homelessness on the increase and rising mortgage rates. The population will love it!

but its better for Andrew to live there?

[Lilyflo]

Originally Posted by Denville

Andrew is the queen's son, and he has the lease on Royal Lodge. He needs to live in a protected area, unlike hte Kents and Gloucesters.

They live in protected areas and so can Andrew. I'm sure there are sufficient lower maintenance properties at Windsor, Sandringham, KP and St James for him to choose from.

[Moonmaiden23]

Originally Posted by Curryong

Yes, and great PR for the monarchy in a country with homelessness on the increase and rising mortgage rates. The population will love it!

Exactly. The vibe I am getting from this entire cost cutting spree of Charles' is that everyone ELSE should downsize, but "I, Me and Mine" meaning he and Camilla and perhaps William will live as lavishly as ever. Charles has read the public pulse. He knows that putting the screws to Andrew will play well with the broader public AND will give the impression that the king is feeling the austerity pinch along with everyone else.

He is also fairly comfortable that York, unlike Sussex, will not go rogue on him.

Win-Win for Charles.

[Toledo]

There's an expression in the USA used when asking favors from other people, beggars can't be choosers. When you have no other options, just appreciate with what is being offered. It's very generous of King CIII to provide him a home within his home while he gets his act together. Just like that old song from the Hollies He Ain't Heavy He's My Brother

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dic...-t-be-choosers

Let's hope Charles sets some rules like no wild parties, not loud music after 10 PM, cut the lawn, take the trash out on your own...

[yukari]

Originally Posted by Curryong

So William and Kate will have Anmer, the huge apartment at KP AND Royal Lodge. Rather an embarrassment of riches for one family one would think!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Anmer Hall is private property while KP and Royal Lodge (and Frogmore Cottage) are Crown Estate's.

In my understanding, KP for William is similar to No 10 Downing Street for Rishi Sunak. It's tied to the job. No 10 Downing Street IS the official residence of the Prime Minister, but just because Sunak is the PM, it's not actually his. So is KP for William.

[Curryong]

I meant in my post that William and Kate and family would have all the properties mentioned as homes, would be able to use them as residences.

I am aware that no senior members of the royal family actually own these properties, but they still have the full use of them for their lifetimes anyway if they wish. Unlike ordinary people who struggle with a mortgage on one home and if very lucky may have a holiday home as well later in life.

And the optics of one family, even if it is the heir to the throne’s, being able to move from one house to another to yet another at different times is still terrible imo.

[yukari]

But that's the thing, right? Being the heir to the throne comes with the privilege. It's the reality of life, some people just born into privilege.

Take Hugh Grosvenor for example. How much his wealth he earned on his own, not by winning birth lottery of being born as the only son of the 6th Duke of Westminster? Technically the British public didn't elect Rishi Sunak to be their PM and his position comes with the privilege to call No 10 Downing Street as his residence for him to live and entertain his guest for as long as he is in the position, should he gives up his private house(s?) and wealth because of optic since the citizens of the country he's leading is struggling with living cost and homelessness?

I'm sure if Andrew (or Harry) were the heir, he'd have the same privilege as William now.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23

Exactly. The vibe I am getting from this entire cost cutting spree of Charles' is that everyone ELSE should downsize, but "I, Me and Mine" meaning he and Camilla and perhaps William will live as lavishly as ever. Charles has read the public pulse. He knows that putting the screws to Andrew will play well with the broader public AND will give the impression that the king is feeling the austerity pinch along with everyone else.

He is also fairly comfortable that York, unlike Sussex, will not go rogue on him.

Win-Win for Charles.

Evidence of this? Charles is good with money, and he may well have pointed out to Andrew that such a big house is going to cost him a lot to keep up, for the rest of his life.. and we dont know what Andrew's finances are like or whether he can afford to keep the house repaired and looked after. He haas put a lot of his own money into it, so Im sure that Charles has taken into account waht would be proper to pay him for doing that.

[SirGyamfi1]

Originally Posted by Curryong

Yes, and great PR for the monarchy in a country with homelessness on the increase and rising mortgage rates. The population will love it!

This is so funny to me, I think many people are aware that William doesn’t personally own a home himself, and the homelessness situation doesn’t have a direct link to the Crown properties he has access to.

[SirGyamfi1]

Originally Posted by Lilyflo

They live in protected areas and so can Andrew. I'm sure there are sufficient lower maintenance properties at Windsor, Sandringham, KP and St James for him to choose from.

I don’t think London regardless of which properties are there would be good for Andrew at this moment.

[Curryong]

To go off topic for a minute re Andrew?s allowance from the Duchy of Lancaster funds being cut by Charles. The late Queen gave him 247,000 pounds a year. If Charles has told Andrew (as he apparently has) that, from this April, his yearly stipend is going to be cut, my feeling is that this will not be a nibbling around the edges but a significant chopping down to possibly less than 200,000 a year.

Now Charles has less to live on himself as the holder of the Duchy of Lancaster funds rather than the Duchy of Cornwall?s, this is also likely to affect all those whom Queen Elizabeth helped with a yearly stipend not just Andrew. Charles will almost certainly decrease what the Queen gave per year to her daughter Anne, to her son Edward (who is imo also unlikely imo to get his Dukedom) the Duke of Gloucester, the Duke of Kent and his sister Prss Alexandra, will, I would guess, all be getting much less help with their living expenses under King Charles than formerly.

They will of course still be getting Sovereign Grant money so long as they keep working. Once they retire that ceases. So this pulling in of expenses doesn?t just begin and end with Andrew.

[Moonmaiden23]

Originally Posted by Denville

Evidence of this? Charles is good with money, and he may well have pointed out to Andrew that such a big house is going to cost him a lot to keep up, for the rest of his life.. and we dont know what Andrew's finances are like or whether he can afford to keep the house repaired and looked after. He haas put a lot of his own money into it, so Im sure that Charles has taken into account waht would be proper to pay him for doing that.

Evidence of what? That Charles does not intend to downsize his own lavish lifestyle, or that Andrew is not likely to go rogue?

If Charles had any intention of personal downsizing, the information would have been leaked to the public along with this latest.

As far as Andrew being not likely to turn on his family the evidence speaks for itself.

He and his daughters have shown utmost loyalty to the Firm in the face of occasionally petty treatment over the years (Eugenie and Beatrice imho)

[victor1319]

Originally Posted by yukari

But that's the thing, right? Being the heir to the throne comes with the privilege. It's the reality of life, some people just born into privilege.

Take Hugh Grosvenor for example. How much his wealth he earned on his own, not by winning birth lottery of being born as the only son of the 6th Duke of Westminster?

A little bit off topic, but I hate the idea of a "birth lottery": In nowadays the most of us are the result of adults intermingling because the WANTED to have kids. Our existence is not by accident.

And either our ancestors were going hard to get rich or unfortunately not... And if not, that does not stop us from doing so!

Others have ancestors, that were rich and lost everything - That is life!

And Prince Andrew here is not the spare of the heir by accident! This has been his fate from the beginning!

[SirGyamfi1]

Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23

Evidence of what? That Charles does not intend to downsize his own lavish lifestyle, or that Andrew is not likely to go rogue?

If Charles had any intention of personal downsizing, the information would have been leaked to the public along with this latest.

As far as Andrew being not likely to turn on his family the evidence speaks for itself.

He and his daughters have shown utmost loyalty to the Firm in the face of occasionally petty treatment over the years (Eugenie and Beatrice imho)

How does Charles necessarily live “a lavish lifestyle”? He’s the King, the days of junior lines and cadet lines living lavishly ended a long time ago unless you have massive trust funds and businesses that make good money for you. What petty things have been done to the York girls?