The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 7: Oct. 2022 - Apr. 2023

[suztav]

If I'm not mistaken there is video in the Netflix series of them moving stuff out of Frogmore during their June visit for the Queen's Jubilee. WTH?!

 

[Moran]

I wonder what Charles can do without being accused of being mean to Harry. Even if the decision was his alone, he didn't just do it out of the blue, it came after Harry used and demeaned his family for money for years, after being ungrateful for the home he had been provided without having to lift a finger, just because he was born to Charles. Meghan did even less. All she did was marrying Harry. They literally spat on everything they had been given but when it's taken from them, it's the people doing the taking who are as mean as the Sussexes? Not in my book. For three years, the Sussexes have been regurgitating bile. One has to be a saint to tolerate them and let them keep everything they had been given because - why, in fact?

And yes, we have no idea who paid the mils for the renovation costs. Given the fact that Harry considered Charles' paying his way as his due and the tensions al around at the time, it might well have been the King and the late Queen who paid the bulk of it without making noise, so the noise would die.

 

[Ghost]

The point that I am making is that Charles may very well be exercising some form of eminent domain but if he is doing it as score settling against his younger son, Charles is demonstrating that certain unflattering aspects of Harry's personality are not due to PTSD over the loss of his mother, drug use or being influenced by other parties, rather it is showing that Harry is his father's son.


Perhaps but the Sussexes reportedly paid £2.4 million to cover renovation costs funded by the sovereign grant, I would think that would have covered more than a few years lease. I am basing that on the amounts that Andrew and Edward reportedly paid to renovate their much bigger homes on much more land, and in their cases they got decades long leases.

The lease was separate from the repayment of the repairs, or so I understood. At the time of the repayment there were questions about who really paid, even suggestions that Charles paid in Harry’s name.
Re: Andrew, he paid one lump sum of one million pounds for the lease AND repaired and refurbished for another seven millions. The repairs were a condition of the lease. Maybe the repayment by Harry was a condition of continuation of the lease? Then they are not to be reimbursed. Who knows, the Crown Estate has a reputation of having a lot of complicated regulations.

 

[Hallo girl]

If the Sussexes are in good financial standing with Frogmore Cottage, I do not agree with Charles evicting them against their will. I can see Charles having issues with Harry's book and other Sussex actions but to me this is not the correct action to take.

I will be happy to hear that there is more to the story about this eviction, along with the reports that Andrew is also being relocated against his will and Edward not yet being named the Duke of Edinburgh, but thus far what these actions (or inactions) demonstrate to me is that the pettiness, spitefulness and score-settling aspects of Harry's personality that has come to light in recent times are traits Harry inherited from his father.

Could we take the royal out of this, if any of us owned a property that we leased out and as the lease was due to be renewed we decided for whatever reason we did not wish to continue with the arrangement , provided the tenants with sufficient notice to move would you have a different view on this.

If the tenants had decided not to renew , what could you say...nothing.

It is only reports about Andrew, and all the other stuff , are only rumours nothing is fact as yet.

There has been a great deal going on, lets wait and see what happens.

 

[wartenberg7]

I think we probably will see Andrew moving in there, and that it's part of a general move round. I certainly don't think it's been done just as a move against the Sussexes.

Perhaps, but obviously they (the Sussexes) seem to regard it as such.

 

[wartenberg7]

If the Sussexes are in good financial standing with Frogmore Cottage, I do not agree with Charles evicting them against their will. I can see Charles having issues with Harry's book and other Sussex actions but to me this is not the correct action to take.

I will be happy to hear that there is more to the story about this eviction, along with the reports that Andrew is also being relocated against his will and Edward not yet being named the Duke of Edinburgh, but thus far what these actions (or inactions) demonstrate to me is that the pettiness, spitefulness and score-settling aspects of Harry's personality that has come to light in recent times are traits Harry inherited from his father.

Well, if I remeber correctly this house was refurbished for them for millions of pounds. The average couple has to buy a property on their own - they have been given it. Nothing wrong with that, IF they kept on using it on a regular basis while doing what they were meant to do, working for the Monarchy and by that for the country all their wealth and status was based upon! After quitting and stabbing large parts of the RF in the back the Sussexes hardly ever used it ever since. Absolutely hilarious Harry even had the sorry guts to do his british "Spare" interview there...
No, they have lost every right on this house for ever!

 

[Queen Claude]

If the Sussexes have the type of lease that is renewable annually or biennially, then I agree that the landlord has the right to not renew their lease. It seems strange to me that the Sussexes would themselves reimburse the Sovereign Grant £2.4 million to cover the costs associated with renovating Frogmore Cottage, but then put themselves in a position where they lose the home based on whims of the leaseholder. The only way that I can make sense of it is if some form of reimbursement scheme was built in and the Sussexes will get back what they paid in, adjusted accordingly.

 

[Granada]

Still think it is two reasons that the Sussex's are being asked to vacate Frogmore Cottage. One is an emotional response by The Firm, and actually smart. Three years of non stop complaining and allegations. The Family finally said enough. And made a move to sideline The Sussex's in The UK.

Removing the "toehold", the base that The Sussex's have to come back to and potentially cause mischief.

More " filming at a Crown Property " Frogmore, for say ANOTHER Netflix series. All the footage-photographs of Frogmore Cottage that showed up in the last series.

Don't forget, they also had footage in the Docuseries from the lovely Thatched Cottage that was a gift to the then Princess Elizabeth in 1932. It is on land at Royal Lodge, and allegedly Princes Beatrice gave permission for The Sussex's to film there. I'm sure that rankled the Family greatly.

Well, that will NOT be happening again. VERY smart move.
They won't have the access, with the Photographer following them that is a big part of their entourage.
They won't be allowed, if say they are visiting and staying at Windsor Castle. Which I don't see happening any time soon in any case.

Second reason, is purely Business I believe. Charles wanted to appear to be The Monarch, a leader and head of the Institution. That wasn't going to continue to allow The Sussex's to run roughshod over The Family and demean The Monarchy. So Charles and Co went on the offense and played hard ball.
Neutralizing Harry's ability to have his own Crown leased "home base". Just took it away.

The reports of Andrew now moving there ? I have no idea if true or if it will happen, but it certainly gave some *cover* for TELLING The Sussex's that their lease would not be renewed. To set Andrew up there. But The Sussex's are out.

Basically saying we won't put up with your attacks anymore. We might not respond in words, but we will in action.
Brilliant, Harry wrote and talked himself out of his house. Bet he didn't see that coming one bit either.
Checkmate. I think that if Harry and Meghan continue this ridiculous path they are on, this might be just the first of things to be lost.

 

[ACO]

If the Sussexes are in good financial standing with Frogmore Cottage, I do not agree with Charles evicting them against their will. I can see Charles having issues with Harry's book and other Sussex actions but to me this is not the correct action to take.

I will be happy to hear that there is more to the story about this eviction, along with the reports that Andrew is also being relocated against his will and Edward not yet being named the Duke of Edinburgh, but thus far what these actions (or inactions) demonstrate to me is that the pettiness, spitefulness and score-settling aspects of Harry's personality that has come to light in recent times are traits Harry inherited from his father.

It has been interesting listening to the various show discuss this topic. Seems you not the only one with this view point. There is no love loss with the media and the Sussexes, we all know that. But it would seem they don't like that Charles have made himself look vindictive. Richard Palmer from the Express is very pro Charles and even he sounded disappointed.

Honestly I think most just have issue with the Andrew angle. It is a hard sell for a lot of people that Charles would put out his son and his young children in favor of his very disgraced brother. No matter your issues with Harry it is a bad look.

Though I will say it does bring up a point of Harry wanting to be able to fend for himself financially. Look how easy it was for Charles to deny them access to their home. Having to solely depend on someone else to provide for you who can take it away on a whim is a scary thing. That is the royal life.

 

[Hallo girl]

I am sorry this is beginning to sound like Harry and his family are being put out on the streets with no roof over their head, they live in a multi roomed house in the States. They have made it clear they do not feel safe in this country, they are very rarely in that house.
As far as Andrew goes that is not clear as yet just rumour, even if it is true, if Andrew can no longer afford the upkeep of the big house why shouldn't his brother allow him to live in a smaller house on the estate that is very rarely used. I am sure there will be plenty accommodation available in some of the palaces if the Sussex family should come over for visits, which would also include the security for the palaces.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

Yes...it sends quite a message from Charles. It is a symbolic punch in their noses.

But were the Sussexes so attached to Frogmore in the first place? Other than its sentimental value as their first marital home?

I always got the feeling that Meghan in particular was underwhelmed by Frogmore.

And let me be blunt...though Frogmore is obviously a Royal property with history attached to it, it does not begin to compare with their palatial Montecito home, which is the last word in luxury from what I have seen.

 

[ACO]

Harry and Meghan live 99% of their lives in the USA. I agree. They are just fine. They have plenty of money and fund their own life.

This is still about a property they lived in that provided them protection when they were in the UK. That is no longer the case. So I guess they have even less reason to come to the UK since the little protection they did have is now gone, Which probably is the point by Charles.

We heard of the Andrew angle when we heard the eviction. Why would one be true and not the other?

 

[Hallo girl]

Yes...it sends quite a message from Charles. It is a symbolic punch in their noses.

But were the Sussexes so attached to Frogmore in the first place? Other than its sentimental value as their first marital home?

I always got the feeling that Meghan in particular was underwhelmed by Frogmore.

And let me be blunt...though Frogmore is obviously a Royal property with history attached to it, it does not begin to compare with their palatial Montecito home, which is the last word in luxury from what I have seen.

Totally, it is as far as Royals go relatively small. Not for the rest of us but yes as a Royal property small. I am sure I read somewhere that the Queen had offered other properties at the time but they didn't suit the couple.
The palatial royal home in the UK would have came in time, maybe not to Montecito standards but still palatial , but life got in the way and things changed

 

[Alison H]

I can't see that the King would ask them to vacate the property just for the sake of it. It makes sense that it's been done so that Andrew can move in. And it's not as if Harry and Meghan are using it.

 

[Hallo girl]

Harry and Meghan live 99% of their lives in the USA. I agree. They are just fine. They have plenty of money and fund their own life.

This is still about a property they lived in that provided them protection when they were in the UK. That is no longer the case. So I guess they have even less reason to come to the UK since the little protection they did have is now gone, Which probably is the point by Charles.

We heard of the Andrew angle when we heard the eviction. Why would one be true and not the other?

I am not saying it isn't true, but being asked to leave Frogmore has been confirmed by the couple themselves, the Andrew part has not been confirmed. It could be an assumption on the part of the journalists and posters. It ties in with rumours about Charles reducing the financial support that Andrew received from the Queen,

Meghan didn't have any worries about the UK when she rolled down the window of the car to be seen.

I am sure Charles would provide accommodation for them when and if they came to visit the family which would automatically include protection if within the palaces.

 

[Kaye1850]

Just to play devil’s advocate, what if what we’re being told has it backwards?
What if H&M wanted to give up the residence and chose not to renew the lease?
If reports about their ‘money stream’ drying up are true, it would make sense for them to do so. There may have been cash incentive payments to them as well.
An official notice to vacate said property may just be standard legalese.
And I think it very possible the Sussexes could choose to twist these facts to make it appear they are being kicked out of a beloved home.

 

[Katymcwaity]

According to a source quoted by Omid Scobie they haven't emptied the house - "This is not just some random rental they keep for convenience. Every drawer is full, every closet is packed… It’s a real family home.”

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/inside-st...VpzpV0Rhn697te8dwJNBOBohHZ-D4sGMC3VR6vO3cYMbN

I don’t have the luxury of 2 houses but I am sure I would take the stuff I care about even if I left in the hurry. Haven’t they heard if removal men -they do ship internationally or what did they do when Eugenie lived there-did she just shove their stuff to the back of the wardrobe/closet?

 

[ACO]

I am not saying it isn't true, but being asked to leave Frogmore has been confirmed by the couple themselves, the Andrew part has not been confirmed. It could be an assumption on the part of the journalists and posters. It ties in with rumours about Charles reducing the financial support that Andrew received from the Queen,

Meghan didn't have any worries about the UK when she rolled down the window of the car to be seen.

I am sure Charles would provide accommodation for them when and if they came to visit the family which would automatically include protection if within the palaces.

I mean we can't assume Charles would do anything. He just took their home. Doesn't exactly scream "I will offer you a room to stay." And their protection was removed years ago. So...

If they ever visit they will be going to a hotel or staying with friends and or non Windsor family. That is the likely scenario. Most likely we won't be seeing Harry, Meghan, or their kids in the UK for a while. They will be in the Europe for the Invictus Games later this year but that will be one of the limited events bringing them over.

 

[muriel]

Most likely we won't be seeing Harry, Meghan, or their kids in the UK for a while.

After the book, the Netflix series, the truth bombs and the various interviews, I can't see the relationship between Harry and his father and brother recovering.

 

[ACO]

I would agree but I also doubt the relationship was good before that. There is a reason things got to where they are. They all just stopped pretending.

 

[Ghost]

I would agree but I also doubt the relationship was good before that. There is a reason things got to where they are. They all just stopped pretending.

We just don’t know, we only have the Sussexes side of the story. And the chances to have the other side are non existent.
I am almost at the end of the book and there are so many things that sound not very plausible. This is not the thread to discuss the book, what I want to say is that so many times the Sussexes have been proven to be flexible with the true truth that I wouldn’t believe them even if they said it’s day. I would check before believing.

 

[Hallo girl]

I mean we can't assume Charles would do anything. He just took their home. Doesn't exactly scream "I will offer you a room to stay." And their protection was removed years ago. So...

If they ever visit they will be going to a hotel or staying with friends and or non Windsor family. That is the likely scenario. Most likely we won't be seeing Harry, Meghan, or their kids in the UK for a while. They will be in the Europe for the Invictus Games later this year but that will be one of the limited events bringing them over.

That is quite correct we cannot make any assumptions, for all we know the couple were approached and asked if they wanted to continue with the lease. It could have been a joint decision after discussions. I think we should also note that the couple never said they were evicted.
I just wish people would stop inferring that this poor family have been thrown out on the streets with nothing.

 

[Denville]

They obviously dont want the house or they would not have let it to Eugenie as htey did. They know they're never coming back to UK, and that they would not be all that welcome by most of the RF if they did.

 

[ACO]

We just don’t know, we only have the Sussexes side of the story. And the chances to have the other side are non existent.
I am almost at the end of the book and there are so many things that sound not very plausible. This is not the thread to discuss the book, what I want to say is that so many times the Sussexes have been proven to be flexible with the true truth that I wouldn’t believe them even if they said it’s day. I would check before believing.

I am not even talking about the book. I never thought they were as close as the media portrayed. It just seemed like good PR. We all know they play up for the camera because they have to. Even back when (long before Meghan) they would say stuff that had me questioning things. "Diana's boys" was a great story but clearly not a very accurate one.

That is quite correct we cannot make any assumptions, for all we know the couple were approached and asked if they wanted to continue with the lease. It could have been a joint decision after discussions. I think we should also note that the couple never said they were evicted.
I just wish people would stop inferring that this poor family have been thrown out on the streets with nothing.

The Sussexes put out a statement confirming they were "requested to vacate." So yes they were evicted. They were told to pack up their things and never return to the property.

 

[Durham]

I am sorry this is beginning to sound like Harry and his family are being put out on the streets with no roof over their head, they live in a multi roomed house in the States. They have made it clear they do not feel safe in this country, they are very rarely in that house.
As far as Andrew goes that is not clear as yet just rumour, even if it is true, if Andrew can no longer afford the upkeep of the big house why shouldn't his brother allow him to live in a smaller house on the estate that is very rarely used. I am sure there will be plenty accommodation available in some of the palaces if the Sussex family should come over for visits, which would also include the security for the palaces.

Yes indeed. Sadly there were reports yesterday that homelessness is on the rise in Britain so it would be surprising if many people in the UK were concerned about this media manufactured story about the Sussexes. The amount of family, friends or colleagues who have mentioned this news about Frogmore to me today is exactly zero.

 

[Alison H]

Honestly I think most just have issue with the Andrew angle. It is a hard sell for a lot of people that Charles would put out his son and his young children in favor of his very disgraced brother. No matter your issues with Harry it is a bad look.

It's not a bad look at all. If it reduces Andrew's living expenses, it's a very good look. No-one is being "put out". Harry and his family do not live at Frogmore Cottage: they live in a mansion on the other side of the world. As for his young children, Lilibet has never lived at Frogmore Cottage, and Archie only lived there when he was too young to have any memories of it. They're hardly being thrown out on to the street.

 

[Hallo girl]

This is all becoming over dramatic for me. Catch up with you all later,

 

[Kaye1850]

The Sussexes put out a statement confirming they were "requested to vacate." So yes they were evicted. They were told to pack up their things and never return to the property.

Oh, my. That’s quite a leap…

 

[Granada]

It will be VERY interesting to see how this development factors into their decision regarding attending The Coronation. Especially, if as Omid Scobbie reported, they were stunned and blindsided by the move to take the House away.

Of course, its not the "House", they are not living there and rarely use it. But it was theirs to use as they saw fit or needed. Perhaps down the line, in Harry's mind, the base to introduce Archie and Lili to their heritage on visits to the UK Sussex's home....... Frogmore Cottage.

Now that has been taken from them. That is the unmistakable symbolism and message behind the move. Wow.

I would assume this decision would cinch a "sorry no, we are unfortunately unavailable to attend The Coronation". But then that's me......LOL.

If they attend, it shows me they are STILL dependent on being perceived as members in the "mystique of monarchy". Needed still to further their Brand. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

If they choose not to attend, to me it signals a new direction, AWAY from solely identifying and enriching themselves by constantly talking about The Royal Family and their alleged slights and grievances.

I would actually have respect for them if they don't attend. Harry said he couldn't go unless there was a conversation about past experiences and an apology to Meghan. Since that doesn't appear to be on the table, I will be very interested to see the Sussex's Coronation Plans.

 

[ACO]

Oh, my. That’s quite a leap…

I mean that literally what eviction is. ?

As for the coronation. My guess is that Harry will attend alone. He will only go to the one main event at WA and spend the rest of the time packing up Frogmore Cottage since they have to be out by the end of May.

And then that will be it.