Why does Charles need 10 residences?

[PosieLuton]

Is this his version of a slimmed down Monarchy? He has always been known to be a spendthrift with himself and very careful with everyone else. So his residences are:
Buckingham Palace, Clarence House, Sandringham, Windsor Castle that is currently being renovated for him, Highgrove, Balmoral, Birkhall and Castle of Mey, plus his Romanian home and Llwynywermod in Wales.

Obviously that's excessive even for an entitled royal.

Well, he can't do anything about Buckingham Palace, Clarence House, Windsor Castle (plus St James Palace and Kensington Palace) as they are all owned by the monarch as an institution (not him as an individual). All he can do is see that they are well used.

That leaves Highgrove (very much "his" - taken a close interest since the 1980s) I don't know if he'd be thinking of passing it on - Harry is uninterested in living in UK and George and his siblings too young.

Sandringham and Balmoral (and Osbourne still?) are privately owned by the monarch, and I suspect will remain that way, though perhaps with even longer public-opening seasons

Don't know so much about status of Birkhall, Castle of Mey and Llwynywermod and what their futures might be. The Romanian project is quite recent, so might continue. What's the status of Poundbury?

What about Dumfries House in Ayrshire? Is that still classed as a residence? Or has it gone to William?

Buckingham Palace office of the Monarchy. Not personally owned. Opens to the public to earn an income.

Clarence House his residence as POW, will likely vacate in due course. Not personally owned.

Sandringham inherited from his mother, personally owned. Holiday home.

Windsor Castle not personally owned. Does not live here. Open to the public to earn an income.

Highgrove personally owned. Lives here when not working. Opens to the public to earn an income.

Balmoral inherited from his mother, personally owned. Holiday home. Opens to the public to earn an income.

Birkhall is on the balmoral estate and as such is not "extra"

Castle of Mey belongs to a charitable trust. Charles does not own it. Opens to the public to earn an income.

his Romanian home he has an abroad house.

Llwynywermod in Wales as the POW it makes sense that he owned a home in Wales.

So he personally owns 5, though he inherited 2 of those on the death of his mother. No doubt in due course he will make changes to this.

3 belong to the Crown Estate (not personally owned by the Royal family)

1 is owned by a charity.

He Opens 4 of these properties to the public to earn an income for their keep / funds given to the govt.

I don't know about the Dumfries House.
And of course Charles can do something about other properties like not designate them as his to live in.

And those he personally owns were bought with taxpayers money.

He doesn’t need them but they are royal residences. In effect, the UK owns them.
It’s not like he can sell them and give up work on the proceeds is it?
Having a royal family brings in much more money to the UK economy (tourism and business) than abolishing them would. Without them we would all have to pay more taxes.

The Castle of Mey was given to a Trust to manage and closes to the public when Charles and Camilla stay there, They do use it. So it is another residence from them whatever dodgy ways they have set up to manage the property.

OP his properties (at least 2 that I know of in Romania) are not used as ‘his residencies’. His foundation has done a huge amount of work in Transylvania with a focus on historical rehabilitation and biodiversity.

The houses that were purchased were of historical interest (architecturally, they are very modest rural houses), have been restored using traditional methods (new local workshops and training schemes were set up like this) and opened up to the public either as guest houses or as museums. I stayed in one of them more than once.

Him putting his name to these projects and his significant personal involvement have done wonders for the area. The locals love him.

What's the status of Poundbury?

It's part of the Duchy of Cornwall, so now effectively owned by William

www.symondsandsampson.co.uk/Content/documents/poundbury/The-Poundbury-Stipulations-The-Poundbury-Design-and-Community-Code.pdf

And of course Charles can do something about other properties like not designate them as his to live in

Well, seeing as he hasn't, he's off to a good start then!

I'm not surprised when people do not understand that it is the Crown that owns several of them, not him in any personal sense.

@TwilightSilhouette Different Royal residences are allocated to different people to live in. These are allocated to Charles. The Queen Elizabeth had fewer homes although still a lot.

If the Crown owns them the trust could just sell them then and give the money to the government?

Charles bought this Romanian house and does stay there each year.
www.mirror.co.uk/news/royals/king-charles-secret-estate-romania-28128168

Sell them to who? A Russian billionaire?

@PuttingDownRoots You think only Russians have a lot of money? There would be American billionaires who would love to own a former Royal palace.

Which of the above mentioned buildings do you believe could and should be sold to an 'American billionaire'?

Why would they do that? Places like Windsor and Buckingham Palace etc are buildings of significant historic importance, and house an extensive art and object of historical importance collection. The buildings open to the public so the items inside can be viewed and appreciated.

Why would you sell these to line the governments pockets when the buildings generate millions in tourism?

So you want someone who owns multiple homes from America to own it instead of someone from the UK who has multiple homes to own it?

As that article clearly states, he stays (used to) there a couple of night a year and the house was open to the public when he
was not in residence.

As it happens I believe that house is now converted into a training venue in support of the Foundation’s activities.

however this is also one of his properties in case you’d like to book a stay:

zalan.transylvaniancastle.com

and here is more about the work his foundation does in romania

princes-foundation.org/princes-foundation-in-romania

so please don’t send me misleading headlines from the mirror who have seemingly still not moved on from Transylvania = vampires

So you want Charles to have at least ten residences? And this is slimming down?

Yes, I think several Crown properties probably could be opened to tourists or put to some other gainful use, but selling a part of British heritage to 'American billionaires' is crass. There would also be security implications with some of the properties.

I think there's a good chance Charles will seek to have some Crown properties put to more practical use, but he's only been king a few months. What does the OP want, exactly?

It is still a guesthouse. He may still stay there.

He doesn't. But then neither do we need a royal family.

@IcedPurple What I want is for his slimming down not to mean Charles gets lots more properties and money and everyone else gets less. That is what seems to be happening.