The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #901  
Old 01-19-2020, 06:33 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
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.

I watch those home buying shows and some of them are in the U.K. ...and there seem to be quite a number of ppl in the U.K. living in homes I could never afford so.....perhaps it's all relative to the individual?


Yes nice to chat...it's interesting!



LaRae
__________________

  #902  
Old 01-19-2020, 06:34 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 12,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
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.
There are businesses and non royals who have properties among the crown estates. Sandringham, Windsor, Kensington, all non royals there too.

And plenty of family members who were not working royals as well.

Nothing at all new here.
__________________

  #903  
Old 01-19-2020, 06:38 PM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,172
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
Leaving a perfectly habitable house empty on the off chance that its one time occupants might return on occasion for an indeterminate period of time seems wholly unsatisfactory.

This situation could continue for the next sixty years or so.

I do understand that not any old tom dick or harry can live on the Windsor estate but Fort Belvedere has been let commercially although I do realise that the fort is much further away from the castle.

Homeless people can't obviously live in Frogmore cottage but we have a major housing crises in this country. The optics of an immensely rich couple living in a (no doubt) sizeable house in North America whilst retaining a not insubstantial occasional residence in this country are not good.
APT 1 sitting empty too. Frogmore will be used when itís needed. Harry and Meghan will pay for it, so itís really not an issue to anyone.
  #904  
Old 01-19-2020, 06:41 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Northamptonshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 938
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
There are businesses and non royals who have properties among the crown estates. Sandringham, Windsor, Kensington, all non royals there too.

And plenty of family members who were not working royals as well.

Nothing at all new here.
It was the Home Park I was thinking of specifically. I'm sure you're right about the others. I don't have details to hand.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO View Post
APT 1 sitting empty too. Frogmore will be used when itís needed. Harry and Meghan will pay for it, so itís really not an issue to anyone.
I seem to be in a minority of one on this. Ah well I'll live as they say.

Let's hope I'm wrong & Frogmore cottage doesn't become an issue. It's not as if the royal family need any more controversies just at the moment!
  #905  
Old 01-19-2020, 07:05 PM
soapstar's Avatar
Super Moderator
Picture of the Week Coordinator
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hermosa Beach, United States
Posts: 5,539
This thread is about Frogmore Cottage. If you wish to discuss the residences of the Queen, Charles or any other member of the BRF, please take it to their threads.
__________________
  #906  
Old 01-19-2020, 07:13 PM
Eskimo's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 405
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ista View Post
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.
I think you are correct, they might only pay for it if they use it. It would make no sense for them to pay market rent year round on a property that was only occupied for short periods.
  #907  
Old 01-19-2020, 08:00 PM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskimo View Post
I think you are correct, they might only pay for it if they use it. It would make no sense for them to pay market rent year round on a property that was only occupied for short periods.
I doubt rent would be calculated on a sliding scale based on usage. It is not an Airbnb rental.
It can’t be rented out to others or be open for tourists when the Sussexes are not there.
  #908  
Old 01-19-2020, 08:22 PM
Tarlita's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Near Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 2,064
I wonder if some people on here get two residences mixed up.

Frogmore House is a substantial mansion. In my view.
Frogmore Cottage is a much smaller residence that I would never call substantial.
There is no way Frogmore Cottage could ever compete as a grand residence compared to some hollywood homes for instance.

However, Frogmore House would be a competitive grand residence compared to some Hollywood type homes.
  #909  
Old 02-14-2020, 06:47 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 2,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
They've been told that they've got to pay commercial rent on Frogmore, now that they're no longer working royals.
Although that was the suggestion at first, the Telegraph was later told that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will only pay a token rent on Frogmore Cottage.

Prince Charles to fund the Sussexes for a year
Aides last night rowed back on suggestions that the couple would pay a commercial rent on Frogmore Cottage, their Grade II-listed home on the Windsor estate, suggesting they would only pay a peppercorn rent and running costs when they are in the UK.

ETA: The link was shared earlier by Ista: https://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...ml#post2285895
  #910  
Old 02-14-2020, 07:58 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 672
That's even more annoying. All that money spent on doing it up, and now it's going to lie empty and they won't even be paying rent on it. What a waste of money!
  #911  
Old 02-14-2020, 08:01 AM
crm2317's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Belfast, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,530
Will they be paying rent all year round to keep the property or only rent when they stay in the UK?
__________________
God Save the House of Windsor
  #912  
Old 02-14-2020, 08:05 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 619
My personal view is that the Frogmore cottage was at one point made up of multiple small cottages, which staff used at one time. I am not saying they were made to move or anything like that, but with the benefit of hindsight it would have been better use of funds to renovate while retaining the multiple occupancy.
It seems such a waste of a lovely property and money for it to lie unoccupied for lengthy periods of time.
  #913  
Old 02-14-2020, 08:25 AM
acdc1's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: somewhere in, United States
Posts: 2,076
For Frogmore, could it possibly be used by someone else in the family- Beatrice or Eugenie maybe?
  #914  
Old 02-14-2020, 08:32 AM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,172
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hallo girl View Post
My personal view is that the Frogmore cottage was at one point made up of multiple small cottages, which staff used at one time. I am not saying they were made to move or anything like that, but with the benefit of hindsight it would have been better use of funds to renovate while retaining the multiple occupancy.
It seems such a waste of a lovely property and money for it to lie unoccupied for lengthy periods of time.
There were documents provided by the papers of the property. It was mostly abandoned and worn down. No one really was moved. It was going to be renovated long before Harry and Meghan decided to move in.

The property was already sitting empty. Then Harry and Meghan moved in. Now it will be sitting empty again for parts of the year.
  #915  
Old 02-14-2020, 08:43 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO View Post
There were documents provided by the papers of the property. It was mostly abandoned and worn down. No one really was moved. It was going to be renovated long before Harry and Meghan decided to move in.

The property was already sitting empty. Then Harry and Meghan moved in. Now it will be sitting empty again for parts of the year.
but a LOT of money was spent making it habitable for one royal couple and translated from staff flats to one royal residence... Now it is going to sit empty possibly for quite long periods because I don't think they'll be in the UK much.
  #916  
Old 02-14-2020, 08:48 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by crm2317 View Post
Will they be paying rent all year round to keep the property or only rent when they stay in the UK?
i'd imagine they have to pay rent all the time....I suspect that the idea that they'd pay a commercial rent came up at first because there was criticism of the expenses that had happened and so the RF felt it was better to say that they were recompensing for them.
  #917  
Old 02-14-2020, 08:54 AM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,172
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
but a LOT of money was spent making it habitable for one royal couple and translated from staff flats to one royal residence... Now it is going to sit empty possibly for quite long periods because I don't think they'll be in the UK much.
Money was going to be spent regardless. Point is I feel a lot of faux outrage is happening about a property that was basically abandoned for a long time before the Sussexes decided to move in. Where was all this concern about it sitting empty (as documented it was) prior to them?

They will figure it out.
  #918  
Old 02-14-2020, 11:51 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Mokane, United States
Posts: 644
It's my understanding that as a Crown-owned property it was on the list of properties to be renovated. However, I do believe that the timetable for that renovation was possibly pushed up for Harry and Meghan to be able to move into the property. That's really neither here nor there, though. Either way, it is a Crown-owned property that was on the renovation schedule as many Crown-owned properties are. I think the consternation from many posters here, myself included really, is that as a run down and empty property simply waiting its turn to be renovated it really wasn't doing anyone any good but neither was it really doing any harm. Just sitting in the queue, basically. Now the timetable was bumped it, the money was spent, it's by all accounts a beautifully done property that is 100% ready for occupancy and now it's once again sitting empty.

If the property had been earmarked for Harry and Meghan but the renovations had not yet taken place and they'd decided to leave then fine, allow it to continue to remain empty until its turn came up for renovations. But, since it was already bumped up on the list and done up for them, it's really a shame to let all of that go to waste and just have it there empty when someone else would appreciate living in a newly renovated and quite peaceful (as I understand it anyway) home.
  #919  
Old 02-14-2020, 12:11 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Northamptonshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 938
Quote:
Originally Posted by ACO View Post
Money was going to be spent regardless. Point is I feel a lot of faux outrage is happening about a property that was basically abandoned for a long time before the Sussexes decided to move in. Where was all this concern about it sitting empty (as documented it was) prior to them?

They will figure it out.
Well I feel the disquiet over this is perfectly legitimate.
  #920  
Old 02-14-2020, 12:13 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 12,017
Not just anyone can live in such a property for security reasons. It is one reason royals rent is not fair market value. Like the York girls paid at St James. There is limited rental potential. Itís not like any random family would rent.

How many people have vacation homes? How many people in the royal family alone have multiple homes? How much time does Charles spend at any of his homes? Itís not like the house is going to stand vacant and never be used by the couple. They plan to split their time with the UK.

And no a hotel doesnít make sense. They plan to spend extended time there. And have a son. Itís far better and more comfortable for all to have a home to return to when in the UK.

The renovation cost is being paid back. And the house wasnít inhabited anyways. No one was kicked out for them and no one is lacking housing due to them keeping it.
__________________

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 anastasia 2020 bridal gown british brownbitcoinqueen canada chittagong cht clarence house coronavirus crown princess victoria danish royalty diana princess of wales dna dubai dutch dutch royal family earl of snowdon emperor facts fantasy movie general news thread hereditary grand duchess stťphanie hill historical drama house of glucksburg intro italian royal family jewellery jumma kent king salman languages list of rulers luxembourg mail mary: crown princess of denmark monaco history nepalese royal jewels nobel 2019 northern ireland norway norwegian royal family palestine prince dimitri princess alexia (2005 -) princess laurentien princess of orange queen mathilde random facts rown royal court royal dress-ups royal jewels royal marriage royal re-enactments. royal wedding royal wedding gown saudi arabia serbian royal family settings sweden thailand thai royal family tips tracts uae customs united kingdom united states of america working royals; full-time royals; part-time royals;


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:53 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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