Duchy of Lancaster Theft

[Roussette]

Just when I thought I could not be more taken aback at some of the practices undertaken by our Monarchy, and the sheer greed.

I then read this article. Bottom line.... anyone who dies intestate in Lancashire, and parts of Merseyside, Grtr Manchester, Cheshire and Cumbria... their assets are scooped up by the Duchy of Lancaster who has collected more than £60M over the last 10 years. Not charity as is the norm.. but into the pocket of our King You need to read the article to see what he actually does with it and how it benefits his personal income.

The article explains it well and will answer any questions and queries about it.

Someone yesterday accused me of 'despising' the RF. I disagreed but I am beginning to wonder if that poster was right. Especially when I read something like this.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/23/revealed-king-charles-secretly-profiting-from-the-assets-of-dead-citizens?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

The Savoy Chapel isn’t private - anyone can visit it.

I know that. Yes of course it's part of the Duchy, I know that too! However, it is in the West End of London and that doesn't make it right that money is channelled there from people who died in the DoL area in the north.

However, it is in the West End of London and that doesn't make it right that money is channelled there from people who died in the DoL area in the north.

It’s not like they’ll be looking to go and visit where their money was spent though, is it? They are still very much historic DoL lands.

No, they won;t be visiting

Not sure, that makes it right though

What does that mean, historic Duchy of Lancaster? Its owned by the Duchy, yes? It's not owned by the public. We may visit, but it isn't ours and I am not sure why we should pay the upkeep- alive or dead.
The Duchy is a private estate of land, property and assets incorporated by Royal Charter and held in trust for the benefit of the Monarch as Duke of Lancaster. The Monarch is is entitled to the income generated by His Duchy, but is not entitled to the Duchy’s capital nor to capital profits.
If he is entitled to the income, then he should be responsible for expenditure himself too.

The expenditure comes out of the income - Charles receives the profits.

I meant for the maintenance of the Savoy chapel.

Nothing surprises me about the Royal family or The Firm . Its all about keeping it in the family . The rich get richer and the surfs struggle as the rich watch . I was told by my father when I was a young child that the rich stole from the people , if we go back hundreds and hundreds of years when the people lived on the land surviving life, the Kings or Queens who ever ruled would steal properties and land from the innocents and bequeath it to their family and friends , thus the people were thrown off to die or were forced to pay exorbitant rents to their now landlords . If they couldn't they would be burnt out or starved . So these aristocrats who thought the surfs were less than an insect stole from them .

And so it is

The surfs?

I'm really not bothered by this at all. As others have said, it's all easily avoided by simply writing a will.

£60 million taken over a decade does bother me!

Then make sure you have a will, and make sure that other people know the importance of having a Will, including what happens to their estate if they die intestate and no will is found.

Only when appropriate though, I don't mean suddenly proselytising (not least as that could be counterproductive) but dropping in to conversations about death, or future planning, or similar. I think avoiding it going to the government might be the strongest motivator - what if you died during a term of a government you thoroughly despised? At least with the Duchies there's a chance of it going to a charity. But if you don't want it going to either the head of state/heir or the government, then you really need a will. And also to leave easily discoverable instructions on where your Will can be found

It doesn’t go to charity from the Duchy ( a tiny % might but if you follow it back it will likely end up in Charles ‘ pocket ) Charles chooses the charity ( his own houses)

When the government claim bona vacantia they publish a list of the names of the deceased - they make it simple to follow as you’d expect

Do the royals ? Of course not .
They put a list in the back pages of the times but publish as and when they feel with no pattern . Just to make it that bit harder for people
Why nor simply add to the government system ?

Charles isn’t correcting anything with this sudden announcement- he’s just moving his investments to ethical ones. Window dressing . They think people are stupid .
The whole feudal ripoff must stop now.
The government should manage the whole system

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/23/turn-in-his-grave-the-dead-whose-assets-went-to-king-charles-estate?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_gu&utm_medium&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1700768766

They put a list in the back pages of the times but publish as and when they feel with no pattern . Just to make it that bit harder for people. Why nor simply add to the government system ?

Why, indeed. The natural search would be on .gov the Treasury Solicitor section, but no, it's put on the back of the Times. Who on earth would think to look there?
Reading that article and the actual individuals this has happened to is very sad.

Here are the Duchy's Solicitors with details of the 'geographical jurisdiction' the Duchies have over certain people's estates.
https://www.farrer.co.uk/campaigns/bona-vacantia/deceased-individuals/

This stuck out for me...
The Duchies are not responsible for any liabilities attaching to any dissolved company, nor for administering insolvent estates (where the estate liabilities exceed the estate assets)
Why am I not surprised?! They wouldn't touch someone's estate with a bargepole if there were liabilities!

Also, it appears that bona vacantia applies to dissolved companies too, when they have not been dealt with... and that will include land, bank accounts, cash, insurance policies, trademarks, patents. I need to look into this more to understand it.

The word 'escheat' crops up a lot. I had to look it up.
the reversion of property to the state, or (in feudal law) to a lord, on the owner's dying without legal heirs

Yes a pro Windsor poster was laughing about people not being familiar with escheat
I don’t know why it’s so funny as it’s the same process as bona vacantia - just further along.

Yes the ‘royals’ take dissolved businesses too and land of course which becomes ‘ownerless’

OK @Novella4 I am not laughing at you because I appreciate that the vast majority of British citizens are not taught at all how our country runs.
Pretty much everything in the country like land, businesses, even nominally our freedom is basically held on loan from the Crown. That’s why prisoners are detained at His Majesty’s Pleasure. There’s a whole network of conventions and traditions which have grown up around this but we’re basically in a feudal system with a Parliament superimposed on us, and Parliament is in practice pretty subservient to government, particularly as govt exercises what’s called royal prerogatives.
All the organs of government dance around each other to a certain extent, basically to my eyes to ensure nothing changes. That’s why, if the Queen had wanted to do something related to the Brexit legislation, she didn’t do it because that power hasn’t been used for three hundred years. It would take a huge upheaval to change things formally.
All this is to explain that however objectionable bona vacantia and related practices might be, they are entirely expected (expectable?) and normal in the UK.

As has been said, its all well and good for people like you to say this, but some people can't afford a will. Some people have other complex reasons they don't have one. The free will network isn't actually free, charities are left with the bill.
At least with the Duchies there's a chance of it going to a charity. There more chance of it going to your community with the state though, they're obliged to. The Duchies are not, in fact it often goes to their own personal trust that pays for the upkeep and maintenance of their own properties. So what you've said is not true at all.

@CeciledeVolangesdeNouveau
I wasn’t referring to you at all. I didn’t note any mocking of citizens at all in your posts . I find your posts interesting .

I’ve been wondering if the other remaining monarchies in Europe also pocket the estates of the deceased .
Anyone like to guess?
It’s not difficult
The answer is no .

So, it goes to the State in other countries? Not this feudal system?

Surprised? No I am not.

So are we simply accepting a practice set up in 1265 whereby the ‘royals’ simply ‘own’ the Duchy and pocket anything left unclaimed ?

This has worldwide attention now . Charles has jumped to deflect with some PR but it’s not fooling people . And he’s only now moving his investments into ‘ethical ‘ investments - he’s not handing the money to the state !

The UK monarchy is feudal and not fit for purpose .
No other European monarchy would DARE have a coronation but the Windsors insist and it is not mere gaudy entertainment- it sets the Windsors above the law
A summary of European monarchies:

UK —— Charles pockets the bona vacantia estates and dissolved businesses

Spain — to the state
Norway - to the state
Sweden - to the Swedish inheritance fund which helps young people , children and disabled people
Denmark - to the state
Netherlands- to the state
Belgium - to the state

People may be interested in this document ( it’s very readable )

“Europe’s last imperial monarchy “
If you google that title it should come up

If someone really wants to make a will they can, if £50 is all you can afford then there are schemes out there to help. There are many excuses people can and do use for not making one but it usually boils down to a reluctance to address the subject of death and instead bury their head in the sand.

What’s Charles’s excuse ?

Well.... I feel sorry for those people in that position. Maybe they are in a home, maybe they are scared of death, maybe they still hope relatives will contact and help them, mental health issues, assuming everything would go to the State and be happy with that, being muddled or ill. There's a lot of reasons why this might be.

Why should Charles be held to account? Instead let’s hold to account the people who died intestate (with no remaining traceable relatives) who have not had an iota of Charles’ privilege and advantage.