Prince Andrew Relinquishes Use of Titles & Honours, 17 Oct 2025

[Durham]

As others have said he is still the DofY.

He can't renounce his peerage as there is a time limit in the 1963 Peeragres Act. It has to be done within the first year of becoming a (hereditary) peer.

https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/peerages-can-they-be-removed/

He could renounce his royal status & cease to be a prince & HRH. That process was followed by a grand daughter of Queen Victoria - Patricia of Connaught who chose to renounce her style/title upon marriage.

It would be better for the monarchy if he did just this & reverted to being styled as the younger son of a duke - he was after all born a younger son of a previous Duke of Edinburgh.

 

[Kaye1850]

I see the Royal website is as usual lagging behind...

The Role of The Royal Family

www.royal.uk

Goodness, you’re right ~ there is even no mention of little Athena as a granddaughter although she was born back in January.
Apparently updating the website is not a priority?

 

[ACO]

Do I understand correctly that the titles and honors still remain but he won’t simply just use them? If so I don’t really see the point, especially since he’s no longer representing the crown and has no official role to use the titles.

Exactly. Literally nothing has changed. But the palace PR takes a little heat off Charles as it appears he was “punished” despite literally nothing has changed.

 

[Muhler]

Wise decision. The BRF can move on and Andrew himself can also move on. He may have lost some titles, but he hasn't lost his family, home or means of living. Instead he can move about without too much bother, because he has been "punished" and is no longer an official part of the BRF.
If this is well received by the public, and I think it will, then it may create a precedence for Harry. (Yes, It's off topic. But the public opinion may put King Charles under pressure for doing something similar.)

 

[Queen Claude]

I am surprised how quickly it happened, last week we were talking about him no longer being allowed to hunt on royal land, now he is having all but his born title removed. I wonder if some new information involving Epstein is about to come out or what other means of pressure Charles was able to put on Andrew to make it happen.

It is a total guess on my part but my immediate thought was that Andrew was able to negotiate some kind of financial deal where he will be taken care of in terms of staying in The Royal Lodge including not being on the hook for its maintenance and any other financial support he needs for the rest of his days.

Again this was my initial guess and maybe I am reading too much into it, but one of the articles posted, I think from the BBC, makes a point of stating that he will remain at The Royal Lodge.

 

[ACO]

Wise decision. The BRF can move on and Andrew himself can also move on. He may have lost some titles, but he hasn't lost his family, home or means of living. Instead he can move about without too much bother, because he has been "punished" and is no longer an official part of the BRF.
If this is well received by the public, and I think it will, then it may create a precedence for Harry. (Yes, It's off topic. But the public opinion may put King Charles under pressure for doing something similar.)

Harry and Andrew are not even on the same planet terms of issues.

And let’s be real— Andrew has lost nothing and even this wouldn’t have happened if there wasn’t a book coming out highlighting the sexual assault accusations of a now dead woman.

 

[Mbruno]

As others have said he is still the DofY.

He can't renounce his peerage as there is a time limit in the 1963 Peeragres Act. It has to be done within the first year of becoming a (hereditary) peer.

https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/peerages-can-they-be-removed/

He could renounce his royal status & cease to be a prince & HRH. That process was followed by a grand daughter of Queen Victoria - Patricia of Connaught who chose to renounce her style/title upon marriage.

It would be better for the monarchy if he did just this & reverted to being styled as the younger son of a duke - he was after all born a younger son of a previous Duke of Edinburgh.

Exactly. He is still the Duke of York . He simply chose not to use the title voluntarily.

 

[Meraude]

Do I understand correctly that the titles and honors still remain but he won’t simply just use them? If so I don’t really see the point, especially since he’s no longer representing the crown and has no official role to use the titles.

Exactly. Literally nothing has changed. But the palace PR hates a little heat off Charles as it appears he was “punished” despite literally nothing has changed.

To have the title Duke of York removed from price Andrew would require an act of Parliament, and of the King. I doubt the British Parliament would be interested in getting involved in such a matter at the moment, there are more important things to discuss ( for example the danger of an expanding war in Ukraine).

 

[Muhler]

Harry and Andrew are not even on the same planet terms of issues.

And let’s be real— Andrew has lost nothing and even this wouldn’t have happened if there wasn’t a book coming out highlighting the sexual assault accusations of a now dead woman.

No matter, the cat is out of the bag.

And I agree, Andrew has lost very little of substance. He was already put on grass as is, now it's just official with fanfares.

 

[royal-blue]

The King should take the opportunity to remove all titles from Harry and his family and also Beatrice and Eugenie. None of them are public figures any more and should be encouraged to be totally private citizens.

 

[Elly C]

I think this is an appropriate and swift response from the Royal Family to deal with the possibility of events spinning out of control. Okay, he hasn’t been stripped of his titles, but the indignity and humiliation is there for all to see. He is in effect prevented from using these titles in any public way. It’s true there will be those who will never be satisfied with any punishment dealt out to Andrew, but this is a damage limitation exercise, and as such, the family have probably done enough to satisfy most of public opinion.

 

[tihkon2]

The King should take the opportunity to remove all titles from Harry and his family and also Beatrice and Eugenie. None of them are public figures and more and should be encouraged to be totally private citizens.

No. The girls have done nothing and it would be petty and in my opinion , quite nasty to do so. Thankfully I don't think the king or William have any inclination to remove their titles.

 

[ACO]

No. The girls have done nothing and it would be petty and in my opinion , quite nasty to do so. Thankfully I don't think the king or William have any inclination to remove their titles.

They didn’t even remove Andrew’s titles. And they wouldn’t even have had him “drop” them if it wasn’t public pressure due to his association with Epstein.

No matter your opinion of the others— if you can’t do it for a him, what’s the excuse to do it with the others?

 

[duke of poliganc]

I don’t agree about stripping titles for bad behavior, they are hereditary titles they got them simply for being related to a monarch not for winning Nobel prizes or humanitarian efforts, and in my opinion it’s a slippery slope to remove titles according to polls and public opinion, if a monarchy is going to be lead by that then Charles know better that opinion especially after Diana’s death was so bad that they called for him to step down and that the throne skip to William instead of him!

As everyone have said he is still a prince and Duke of York, he will still be referred to as prince andrew if he use it or not, the only gain would be that the media headlines would change now from “Prince Andrew the sexual predator” to “prince Andrew the sexual predator who was stripped of his titles” which is really silly that the popular opinion would just be satisfied with such an obvious PR stunt

 

[Andy T]

As I read it, he still has the titles and honours; he just won't "use" them. There's no revocation or stripping of any title or honour. Given that he's not a working royal, this makes very little practical difference; not using titles stifles to a certain extent any campaign to deprive him of them.

IMO, both he and his wife would do well to keep as low a profile as possible, and the working royal family would do well to maintain as much public distance as possible from this thoroughly reprehensible pair. Good riddance to them both. Nonetheless, they remain part of the King's family and if the family relationships are maintained, it would be cruel to expect them to stay away from family events, such as weddings and funerals, albeit as private individuals. I feel sorry for their daughters.

 

[crm2317]

A carefully worded statement indeed.

It is the right decision for all, it appears that a line is being taken my the King however Andrew is also not technically losing his titles simply not using them.

 

[suztav]

The girls haven!’t done anything wrong and shouldn’t be punished. In fact, just yesterday Eugenien escorted the Crown Princess of Jordan. This title deal was certainly known at that time. The girls will carry on — as they should.

BTW, Virginia Giuffee never named any of the other men and I m sure there were plenty!

 

[Diarist]

Still arrogant to the last! Look at the way the way the statement has been worded - the magnanimous Andrew gallantly deciding voluntarily to give up using his titles to avoid distractions to the monarchy. I suspect what has really happened is that the Palace has got hold of an advanced copy of the book and have seen what further horrors are to come and are making a pre-emptive strike.

 

[tommy100]

The titles are in abeyance - the Dukedom was never going to be stripped from him as it would mean Parliament getting involved as only they can pass legislation to strip it.
I'm more interested to see what happens with the Garter and RVO - are they just not being used or have they been taken away?

IMO if the Palace have seen copies of the book and there is more to come they should have held of on announcing it until then, now it leaves them open for the media demanding more when the book extracts come out.

Though there was probably a desire to have the issue settled before the King's state visit to the Vatican next week.

 

[PrincessOfGeorgetown]

The titles are in abeyance - the Dukedom was never going to be stripped from him as it would mean Parliament getting involved as only they can pass legislation to strip it.
I'm more interested to see what happens with the Garter and RVO - are they just not being used or have they been taken away?

IMO if the Palace have seen copies of the book and there is more to come they should have held of on announcing it until then, now it leaves them open for the media demanding more when the book extracts come out.

Though there was probably a desire to have the issue settled before the King's state visit to the Vatican next week.

Not so much "abeyance". Title isn't inactive. It's vested in a person. But certainly the closest idea to what is happening with Andrew.

Abeyance means the title exists, but there is no one who holds the title, usually because of issues determining the heir/incumbent.

 

[tommy100]

I think its telling Andrew's statement says he is stopping using his titles but the Palace machine is pushing the "abeyance" line - sounds like they are trying to make it out to be more serious and permanent than Andrew is.

 

[ACO]

I think its telling Andrew's statement says he is stopping using his titles but the Palace machine is pushing the "abeyance" line - sounds like they are trying to make it out to be more serious and permanent than Andrew is.

Except they allowed him to issue the statement himself and set the tune. Again BP should have released the statement and made it perfectly clear.

Right now everyone guessing based off the vagueness because they never really intended to remove anything:

It’s just lip service:

 

[meeralakshmi]

Wow, didn't see that one coming. But i believe it is a sensible decision.

So he will just be Prince Andrew, nothing else.

And what about Sarah, Duchess of York? Since the daughters are both married and don't use 'of York' anymore, she, in theory, will be the only one left using 'of York'. I suspect that will be nipped in the bud.

She won’t be using that title anymore though like Andrew she legally retains it.

I thought it would be the other way around. The KG is a title of honour and nobility. I could see Andrew relinquishing it.

But wasn't the Dukedom of York a wedding gift from her late Majesty? I thought he would fight tooth and nail to keep it.

This will also impact Beatrice and Eugenie. They can no longer be called HRH "of York" ?

They haven’t been “of York” since they got married, they had to replace “of York” with Mrs (husband’s name).

 

[Curryong]

I think the title of Duke of York will remain in abeyance for the rest of Prince Andrew’s lifetime. It’s quite a shame as York is a very old and revered Dukedom. In more modern times it was of course borne by the late Queen’s father and grandfather.

It’s now so smeared with disgrace and scandal that it’s probably unlikely that Prince Louis will receive the Dukedom in William’s reign (after Andrew’s death of course.)

 

[meeralakshmi]

I agree- plenty of people would probably disagree with the first paragraph.

Last paragraph.

They are Princess Beatrice, Mrs Mapelli Mozzi and Princess Eugenie, Mrs Brooksbank.

Mrs Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi and Mrs Jack Brooksbank.

I think the title of Duke of York will remain in abeyance for the rest of Prince Andrew’s lifetime. It’s quite a shame as York is a very old and revered Dukedom. In more modern times it was of course borne by the late Queen’s father and grandfather.

It’s now so smeared with disgrace and scandal that it’s probably unlikely now that Prince Louis will receive the Dukedom in William’s reign (after Andrew’s death of course.)

If Louis and Charlotte get married before Andrew dies neither can receive the dukedom of York. I mentioned Charlotte because it makes more sense for the dukedom of York to go to the official spare.

 

[sophie25]

When I think of her talking to the News of the World on tape saying that 'Andrew will play', I am astounded that no one in the media have noticed how close the turn if phrase is here.

 

[meeralakshmi]

When I think of her talking to the News of the World on tape saying that 'Andrew will play', I am astounded that no one in the media have noticed how close the turn if phrase is here.

Are you referring to Virginia?

 

[Curryong]

Isn’t that what Sarah said during that long taped interview when she was trying to get lots of money for access to Andrew and the News of the World secretly set it up ? That was so long ago I’d forgotten about it but have just viewed that delightful episode on the other Andrew thread. What a pair!

 

[HenRach Dominion]

I think this is going to hurt the BRF more than it helps. It's too much of a halfway measure.

As others have stated, Andrew still retains his titles. He just won't use them. This doesn't stop anyone else from using them, and if Andrew "accidently" refers to himself as Duke of York, he's not wrong to do so because he still is.

What this does, instead, is put a greater spotlight on Andrew's part in the Epstein affair when many people (at least outside of Great Britain) were more focused on other Epstein associates. Once they realize that Andrew hasn't really lost anything, the non-royalists are going to feel deceived, and that the whole "not using my titles" was essentially a PR stunt to make the BRF look more punitive than it actually is.

Andrew already was no longer representing the BRF anymore. He was in no place where his titles would be publicly used. His "magnanimous" decision doesn't change anything. Heck, this statement probably wouldn't have even been made if the BRF hadn't become more lax with being seen publicly with him (rather than hanging out with him privately).

This would have been more effective if Andrew was actually stripped of his titles outright. HM The King hypothetically has the power to strip him of his princely title (since the monarch has the power to grant princely titles to people), and Parliament has the power to strip away his non-royal aristocratic titles. Many will say that they have more important things on their plate (which I don't deny), but I believe the main reason why they won't is because introducing meritocracy into who holds or don't holds a title would undermine the very system of aristocracy that is entrenched in British society.

So, giving that neither HM The King nor the British Parliament are willing to actually take Andrew's titles away, they should have kept calm and carried on rather than doing something so reactionary and futile.

 

[Alisa]

Oh please. This is just a PR spin ...It smells like more revelations are to come and they're trying to get ahead of it.

People since birth have known him as Prince Andrew. That isn't going to change. I honestly couldn't tell you what Honors he has and I doubt the average person knows either. It also doesn't matter as he no longer represents the royal family. So what's the point?!