Sarah, Duchess of York: "Cash for Access" - May 2010

[bertie5252003]

OMG this is just horrible I am so mortified for her mortification what will she do now .... worse than the Sophie thing IMO and she has nowhere to go and the whole thing is horrible for the Queen just sooo typical of her [Fergie] never learns.

[Wisteria]

I withdraw the word title, it seems to bother people too much. Let us just say that with out Duchess of York after her name she would lose her revenue. She has brought the family into disrepute more than once and I am sure any "request" from the Queen would be respected.
There is no reason to be sorry for Sarah, she got herself into the mess and she is no young adolescent. There is one good way to not get into debt, and that is to stop spending so much. If Prince Andrew doesn´t mind her sponging off him then that is up to him but I think he will mind if her indiscretion costs him his very comfortable employment as Trade representative, for which he is said to have genetical qualifications, and this may well do just that.

[ghost_night554]

Can I just ask what is the worse thing that can happen? I mean okay her relationship with Andrew and the rest of the family might be ruined but beside that....she can't face any legal charges or anything can she? I'm only really concerned for Bea and Eugenie cause they both really trusted they're mother. As for this whole situation I'm not sure what I feel at this point I'll have to think about it for a while and get back to you on that point. This is very tricky situation I dunno how it's going to be handled.

Also can I ask something else how does this hurt Andrew and his work as the Trade representative?

[Jacknch]

I know that Sarah didn't get a fortune from her divorce, but since then she's written books, been working for Weightwatchers, done interviews and magazine deals all for money, yet she's still broke? It's a dreadful situation and she certainly doesn't come across as a good business woman. What if the businessman had been real and actually paid her £500K - she'd then have to somehow pursuade Prince Andrew to meet him and Princ Andrew could refuse - would the man sue for breach of contract or fraudulently obtaining the money under false pretences? Has Sarah burnt her bridges in the business world I wonder?

[Idriel]

But she did nothing illegal or even unethical.

Sarah was offering to an unvetted, shady businessman representing foreign interests not only access but also influence over a member of the Royal family who also is a government representative whose role is to promote and defend British interests exclusively.
She wasn't just selling access, she was selling herself as a lobbyist. In the video she clearly promise to use her influence over Andrew to help the business man make money and to have an active role beyond mere introduction.

FERGIE: And he (Andrew) says, 'Let's play, we'll play' as long as it's nothing to do with him. . . But you will be his friend. I will listen to the friendship talk between you two. And then I do it.
REPORTER: OK.
FERGIE: You two talk.
REPORTER: Right
FERGIE: I listen.
REPORTER: OK.
FERGIE: Then I activate. . . he meets the most amazing people. And he just throws them my way.

So it would come to a situation where an unsuspecting Andrew though he was meeting a new acquaintance of his ex-wife but was really meeting someone who hired her to get to him or where he though he was having an informal conversation with the mother of his children but was really being lobbied.

I don't know in what universe this is not unethical. I would also argue that this could be seen as corruption because in the real world, when 'movers and shakers' are being lobbied, they know they are being lobbied. Lobbyist can be shady people but they usual don't hide who they are and who they are working for. Sarah was being utterly deceitful, lying to her client and also apparently planning to lie to Andrew.
Also, let's not ignore the fact that she is accepting cash from an unknown source (it could have been drug money for all she knew) and that she most certainly wasn't planning to declare it so that she would not have to pay taxes on it.

Don't get me wrong, I look at Sarah and I see a desperate person doing desperate things. I pity her, I really do.
But there is no way on hearth what she did was remotely ethical or even fully legal.

[Lumutqueen]

Originally Posted by ghost_night554

...how does this hurt Andrew and his work as the Trade representative?

I don't think it would hurt his job. All this shows is that his ex wife has no mind and will do anything for money. She can't be charged with anything, its not illegal to talk to a journalist. Bea and Eugenie are the ones who will suffer most on this.

Without the surname, she would still be Andrews ex-wife and she would still make headlines. She gets no official money from the royal family, she gets handouts from Andrew. It bothers people the word title, because she no longer has a title. You can't give her something she doesn't have.

All the money she makes she obviously spends, she was known for spending willynilly when she was a royal. I think she burnt her bridges along time ago. After this no one will take her seriously. I agree she gets jobs because of who she is, not how she is. If she had never married into the royal family, I doubt she would've got a very high proced job.

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by lumutqueen

...why should Beatrice and Eugenie suffer when they have done nothing wrong? They cannot loose there titles now, their children will most likely only be Lords and Lady Windsor, just like Harry's unfortunately will.

Beatrice and Eugenie's children will get no titles through them just as Anne's children have no titles because they are descended through a female.
Harry's will probably take the same route as Louise and James so that without anything officially being said only the children of the monarch and those of the eldest son will have the title.

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by Wisteria

I withdraw the word title, it seems to bother people too much. Let us just say that with out Duchess of York after her name she would lose her revenue.

If she stops using Duchess of York as a surname, which it is, then she is left with being Mrs Sarah Mountbatten-Windsor or reverting to her maiden name.
Regardless of what name she uses she is the mother of the Queen's grandchildren and will always be able to trade on that and that is something the BRF can't ignore.

They can't wash their hands of her as she is permanently linked and she will attend royal functions that relate to the princesses so she will still have contact. It is necessary for the RF to consider the options and maybe revisit the divorce settlement as that was woefully inadequate for her situation.

[Madame Royale]

I, personally, am not aware of the arrangements concerning the York divorce. Is anyone able to shed some light on it for me by any chance?

[crm2317]

I have just watched the video and have to say Sarah should feel very very shamed right now. She has put everything she ever had in jeopardy. Dear knows how this could affect her relationship with her daughters and Prince Andrew. She would jeopardise it for a lump sum!

I think she needs a serious wake up call.

[Wisteria]

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie

They can't wash their hands of her as she is permanently linked and she will attend royal functions that relate to the princesses so she will still have contact. It is necessary for the RF to consider the options and maybe revisit the divorce settlement as that was woefully inadequate for her situation.

You are right up to a point, she will always be the mother of the two girls, but I am afraid that if she is "asked" not to use "Duchess" by the Queen she would understand that the Queen´s requests are to be listened to, and stop. I
can´t see her making money for talking tours and representing products in the US as "the mother of two princesses" at least in the US the word Duchess carries weight, (sorry for once no pun intended). I don´t think that any divorce settlement would be adequate for Sarah, she is a spendthrift and doesn´t seem to be able to stop herself.
She is always sorry, but I feel she has gone too far this time for this to be taken seriously.
As said many times before, she is no teenager.
By the way, what royal functions does she attend?

[Madame Royale]

Originally Posted by crm2317

I think she needs a serious wake up call.

Signed, sealed and delivered I think.

[Iluvbertie]

If she isn't to use 'Duchess' what is she to use though? That is really her surname now so she would need a new name - the only other one is Mountbatten-Windsor which is even more associated with the royals as that is their surname.

Her divorce settlement was about 1 million pounds and a house and some money to help with the children, which amounts to about 15,000 pounds per year. Not much considering Diana got 17 million pounds.

[Duchess]

i'm really shocked. i can't imagine what BP will have to say.

[Hendrik-Jan77]

The Queen could ask her not to use that style anymore. Sarah could then issue a statement that from now on she should just be called Sarah Ferguson and not Duchess of York.
The Queen could also ask her to live abroad and you know as well as I do that when the Queen asks you something it is not a request but an order.
And ofcourse there are the men in grey who could put some pressure on Sarah.
Is this not some kind of bribery or corruption that she took part in? I don't know about the UK, but in my country those actions are penal.
What I meant by the titles of her daughters is that if they and Prince Andrew would be considered as minor Royals just as for example the Gloucesters, scandals like these would no get so much attention. The smaller number of important Royals the less scandals...

[tommy1716]

"The Duchess had sent two aides ahead of her with a seven-page confidentiality agreement which the reporter was told he had to sign before the Duchess would continue the negotiations. He refused to sign it, and the Duchess decided to press on regardless"
How the Duchess of York fell head-first into a tabloid trap - Telegraph

This shows both that this was NOT a spur of the moment decision, she had clealry thought it through and consulted staff to draw up such a confidentiality agreement. And it also shows that Sarah was stupid enough to still go ahead WITHOUT the agreement, is was obvisouly that desperate for the cash and that naive.

[Iluvbertie]

Andrew is the second son of the Monarch. He can't simply be seen as a minor royal in this or the next reign when he will be the brother of the monarch.

The Gloucesters and Kents are the cousins of the monarch but Andrew is the son. There is a difference. His daughters are her direct descendents not the descendents of her father's brothers as the Gloucesters and Kents are.

The Queen doesn't have the right to stop Sarah using the style of a divorced wife of a peer. That is Sarah's right just as it is the right of any other divorced wife of a peer - e.g. Earl Spencer's ex-wives using Countess Spencer the same way.

The Queen also would be considering her granddaughters in this and to tell their mother that she can't be treated the same as any other woman in her situation would tell the girls something they already know - that the royal family has there favourites and they aren't it.

As for being illegal - there is nothing illegal in offering to introduce someone to someone else for a fee. That is all she did - say 'look I know someone who can help you. He is my ex-husband. I can introduce you for a fee' Absolutely nothing wrong with that. If she had said 'look if you pay for dinner I will introduce you to my ex-husband nobody would see anything wrong but because it is cash there seems to be a problem.

I don't see it actually.

I do think there is a lot wrong with the set up here and there should be an investigation into the actions of the NOTW who haven't pulled this stunt once but now THREE times. This is clearly a paper with an agenda - embarass the Queen to the utmost with her relatives and destroy the royal family and all that Britain gains from having this family.

[Madame Royale]

The Queen could also ask her to live abroad and you know as well as I do that when the Queen asks you something it is not a request but an order.

Sarah, Duchess of York divides her time between the UK and America anyhow. And sure, the Queen could pose the question of indefinite relocation to Sarah (which I doubt she would), but I for one don't think Sarah should be pursuaded by anyone. The monarch included.

If, and only if Sarah wishes to leave Britain, should Sarah do so. And I'd be inclined to think the Queen would think along the same lines as that is an entirely personal choice.

[muriel]

I do not think the Queen will get involved. IMO, Sarah herself should relocate abroad (possibly America) and live out the rest of her days outside of the public domain. She should see if she can rebuild some sort of career for herself, and just stay below the public radar.

[rubies]

I have grown soooo tired of people jetting around the world who don't have the means. I see it here in Florida All the time. I don't get it.............I always backed Sarah thinking she did make some of her own money but she is just like every other low life who thinks they deserve a lifestyle that they don't have the means for.
I mean,,, who doesn't want things they can't afford, but the rest of us are just trying to be grateful for what we have and go on with our day!!