The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #881  
Old 01-19-2020, 05:22 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
Both of which are in the United Kingdom.

In addition both Balmoral & Sandringham are at the heart of historic estates that bring great economic benefits to their respective localities. Moreover, there is political sense in living in Scotland for a good two months of the year.

I don't think any of that rationale applies to Frogmore cottage.
It's either an optics issue for any of them that own multiple homes (Charles, The Queen etc etc) or it's not.




LaRae
__________________

  #882  
Old 01-19-2020, 05:36 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Northamptonshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 938
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
They’re paying commercial rent on the property, it is there’s to do with as they wish. Effectively a holiday home, the same as millions of other people worldwide have.
Well yes they are & yes they can.

Indeed it is.

None of that is not true but the fact remains that this property is only theirs because of the official position they once had.

The honest thing to do would be to give it up. Why do they need such a large holiday home anyway?
__________________

  #883  
Old 01-19-2020, 05:40 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Northamptonshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 938
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
It's either an optics issue for any of them that own multiple homes (Charles, The Queen etc etc) or it's not.




LaRae
Ok then let's say I accept your premise.

It is an optics issue for The Queen & Charles.

Now that said, why should Frogmore cottage be retained on the off chance that it might be used someday for some time? It's not a home for anyone anymore is it?
  #884  
Old 01-19-2020, 05:47 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
Ok then let's say I accept your premise.

It is an optics issue for The Queen & Charles.

Now that said, why should Frogmore cottage be retained on the off chance that it might be used someday for some time? It's not a home for anyone anymore is it?

The same reason the others might be used. They say they intend to use it. I see no issue with any of them having multiple homes.



LaRae
  #885  
Old 01-19-2020, 05:48 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 12,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
Well yes they are & yes they can.

Indeed it is.

None of that is not true but the fact remains that this property is only theirs because of the official position they once had.

The honest thing to do would be to give it up. Why do they need such a large holiday home anyway?
Its not a holiday home as in something for vacation a week or two a year. They plan to continue to support their patronages back home. It will be their work base when back in the UK. Both work and when visiting family and friends. Could they use a smaller home? Yes. Do they have to? No. If they can afford to keep it that's their choice.

Plenty of people have second homes in other countries.

It's not like them giving up the home would solve housing issues.
  #886  
Old 01-19-2020, 05:49 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,074
As noted previously, Frogmore cottage is the UK pied à terre for the Sussex family. No doubt the Duke is staying there this week as he waits to return to his family in Canada.
  #887  
Old 01-19-2020, 05:52 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 21,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
Well yes they are & yes they can.



Indeed it is.



None of that is not true but the fact remains that this property is only theirs because of the official position they once had.



The honest thing to do would be to give it up. Why do they need such a large holiday home anyway?

What does it matter why they need it when they are paying for it? Who would you like to use it exactly?
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #888  
Old 01-19-2020, 05:55 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Northamptonshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 938
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
The same reason the others might be used. They say they intend to use it. I see no issue with any of them having multiple homes.



LaRae
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one I guess. I'm not convinced it will be used by the whole family on a regular basis & I think it has the potential to become an issue for a lot people in Britain in a way that the other regularly used residences aren't (unless you're a republican of course!).

There again my guess is as good as yours I suppose!
  #889  
Old 01-19-2020, 05:56 PM
Ista's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: the West, United States
Posts: 2,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
They’re paying commercial rent on the property, it is there’s to do with as they wish. Effectively a holiday home, the same as millions of other people worldwide have.
I read in the Telegraph (so take with a grain of salt) that apparently this evening someone at BP was walking that back a bit, and were indicating that they would only pay for the times they were there, so much less than the commercial yearly rate.

Let me see if I can find the link...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-fa...ghan-will-pay/
  #890  
Old 01-19-2020, 05:59 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Northamptonshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 938
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
Its not a holiday home as in something for vacation a week or two a year. They plan to continue to support their patronages back home. It will be their work base when back in the UK. Both work and when visiting family and friends. Could they use a smaller home? Yes. Do they have to? No. If they can afford to keep it that's their choice.

Plenty of people have second homes in other countries.

It's not like them giving up the home would solve housing issues.
Guess we just see things differently. I wouldn't be surprised if it became an issue in Britain for all sorts of reasons. Then again I might be wrong!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
What does it matter why they need it when they are paying for it? Who would you like to use it exactly?
Because it's a perfectly habitable house that could be a home.

I've no idea!
  #891  
Old 01-19-2020, 06:02 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one I guess. I'm not convinced it will be used by the whole family on a regular basis & I think it has the potential to become an issue for a lot people in Britain in a way that the other regularly used residences aren't (unless you're a republican of course!).

There again my guess is as good as yours I suppose!


American here...to me it matters not a whit how often ppl use the homes they rent/own.

Not sure where you plan to draw the line...if it is or becomes an issue in the U.K. Do you all expect them too all move back into BP and give up everything else?




LaRae
  #892  
Old 01-19-2020, 06:03 PM
Fem's Avatar
Fem Fem is offline
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: UK, Poland
Posts: 483
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
Better start with the Queen...the same optics apply to her estates that she only uses a few weeks a year.



LaRae
I think people are allowed to start with whatever property they have in mind. Besides, when HMQ is not using her estate, it's usually (to some extent) open to the public, for everyone to see, since they're historic and important and stuff. So no, it's completely not like a private house of non-working royals.

That said, it's the lifestyle of rich&famous. As long as Prince Charles will be paying rent for the Frogmore Cottage, Harry and Meghan are allowed to use it - or not use it - as they please.
  #893  
Old 01-19-2020, 06:06 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 12,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
Because it's a perfectly habitable house that could be a home.

I've no idea!
And it's being perfectly habited by Harry, Meghan and Archie when they are in the UK. It's been made clear in every statement that the family plans to spend part of the year in the UK.
  #894  
Old 01-19-2020, 06:10 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,188
TBF as a British taxpayer I don't care if they have a "holiday home" at Frogmore so long as they pay for it, which it appears they are going to do.

Interestingly if they re-pay the refurbishment costs and pay rent it would seem, based on precedence, they are paying more than they might have had to. Prince Andrew paid the refurbishment costs of Royal Lodge (some £7million) and in return got to live their rent free.

That deal was not made by the Queen btw but the Crown Estate, likewise the Wessex's pay £90,000 a year in rent for Bagshot. So it will be interesting to see what rent the Sussexes pay.
  #895  
Old 01-19-2020, 06:11 PM
Ista's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: the West, United States
Posts: 2,903
As I noted upthread, it is apparently far from clear how much rent they are actually going to pay.

Or how much Charles is going to be paying for them.
  #896  
Old 01-19-2020, 06:14 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Northamptonshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 938
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
American here...to me it matters not a whit how often ppl use the homes they rent/own.

Not sure where you plan to draw the line...if it is or becomes an issue in the U.K. Do you all expect them too all move back into BP and give up everything else?




LaRae


No I don't expect that to happen. That would be silly. I just don't see the rationale for the recent occupants of Frogmore cottage to retain such a substantial home in a country that they will not be habitually resident in.
  #897  
Old 01-19-2020, 06:20 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
No I don't expect that to happen. That would be silly. I just don't see the rationale for the recent occupants of Frogmore cottage to retain such a substantial home in a country that they will not be habitually resident in.

The Sussexes haven't stated yet how much time they will be spending in each country probably because that's going to depend on what happens with their change of lifestyle.

Wealthy ppl typically have more than one home. There's lots of reasons for that.



LaRae
  #898  
Old 01-19-2020, 06:22 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Northamptonshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 938
Quote:
Originally Posted by tommy100 View Post
TBF as a British taxpayer I don't care if they have a "holiday home" at Frogmore so long as they pay for it, which it appears they are going to do.
Fair enough. Interesting that we both have a different take on this.
  #899  
Old 01-19-2020, 06:26 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,188
The joy of free speech and a forum like this I guess. If they are paying the costs I don't see the issue, or certainly don't see an issue thats specific to them.
  #900  
Old 01-19-2020, 06:30 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Northamptonshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 938
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
The Sussexes haven't stated yet how much time they will be spending in each country probably because that's going to depend on what happens with their change of lifestyle.

Wealthy ppl typically have more than one home. There's lots of reasons for that.



LaRae
Yes I do understand the uncertainty over their plans.

Indeed they do but they don't usually get to live somewhere like Windsor Home Park . Not for all the money in the world.

Hopefully everything will become clear sooner rather than later.

Thanks for the chat. It's good to hear differing viewpoints.
__________________

Closed Thread


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





Popular Tags
abdication althorp anastasia anastasia once upon a time bridal gown british chittagong cht clarence house danish royalty diana princess of wales dubai dutch dutch royal family earl of snowdon facts general news thread heraldry hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume hill historical drama house of glucksburg imperial household intro italian royal family jacobite japan jewellery jumma king salman languages list of rulers mail mary: crown princess of denmark monaco history nepalese royal jewels nobel 2019 northern ireland norway norwegian royal family palestine popularity prince charles of luxembourg prince daniel prince dimitri princess chulabhorn walailak princess laurentien princess of orange princess ribha queen mathilde random facts royal dress-ups royal jewels royal marriage royal re-enactments. royal wedding royal wedding gown saudi arabia serbian royal family settings snowdon spencer family swedish royal family thailand tracts uae customs united states of america wittelsbach working royals; full-time royals; part-time royals;


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:00 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×