Do you think Prince Andrew should be made to leave Royal Lodge?

[Houseplanter]

Another (trashy) article in the press today saying Andrew needs to downsize out of Royal Lodge and make way for Wills & co.

Apparently he doesn't have the fund for its upkeep, it's falling in to disrepair.

W & C obviously could make better use of it.

He's been there 30 years so I can understand he doesn't want to move out of essentially his family home. My own view is he should be in deepest darkest nowhere, but wondered what others thought.

Is there any reason at all to leave him be?

In a nutshell, @mateysmum .
Thank you!

Yes he should leave.
He isn’t a working royal anymore. Due to his own behaviour.
Tough. He should have thought about it before hand.

As for it has been his home fir 30 years etc…
If I can’t pay my mortgage or my rent, I’d be kicked out of my house. Even if I had lived there 30 years.
If I couldn’t afford to maintain my house, I’d downsize too.

Pretty normal for anyone. So why not him?

Don't mind me, just popping in here to laugh the fact so many of you still see this man as your better.

He is legally allowed to stay, no I don't think 'yeah but I don't like him and I want him out' is thankfully not allowed in law

Do people honestly want to pick and choose who the law applies too?

I think if there was any legal way of getting him out it would have happened by now but as I've said from the beginning I think his very advantageously termed lease is watertight and always has been.

I also think he's never been out of the family fold in private and any sabre rattling over kicking him out of RL is PR puff to make C look tough and decisive.

I think you have the wrong thread. Not one person has indicated that they think Andrew is their better.

He's the Royal Family, you've appointed them as your betters by birth.

Did I miss the election where everyone bar Andrew was voted for?

I think you missed the point completely.
I never "appointed" Andrew or anyone.

Well they can pay, they're hardly penniless

And to add - I don't believe he can't afford the upkeep. At one time he was cited as the third richest royal. He's always seen tooling around in top of the range luxury motors and Fergie has acquired a £5m mews house relatively recently.

If he's not paying for repairs it's because he doesn't want to.

Anyone who subscribes to the idea of a royal family doesn't get to pick and choose which royals. That IS the point.

If you wanted lizzie and charlie, you get randy andy. There's no such thing as an a la carte monarchy.

Absolutely yes he does.

I have no idea why you are telling me this.
I know full well about the hereditary monarchy and how it operates. I think you have either the wrong thread or poster.

I agree. If he's letting this rental property fall into disrepair, it's his fault. He can certainly pay for it.

Well, as he benefits from a 75 year lease, as long has he pays the rent and abides by the repair and maintenue obligations then he has the right to stay. I think the issue is he can’t afford it and the King is having to foot the bill, and in addition the Royal Lodge needs its own 24 hour security, costing what’s believed to be around £2m a year, also funded by the King as Andrew isn’t a working royal. And therefore I suspect that this just comes down to how long Charles is willing to foot the bill for his younger brother?

Eh? I've no idea what that means.
I replied to you because I couldn't see any evidence of what you said on here from me or any posters.
I'll just point out a quick correction, Andrew.has no "subjects".

I think you're right. Charles is probably looking at the situation in exactly that way.
Tricky to get him out, and he'll still have to foot some sort of security bill.

I think that’s the point - he isn’t maintaining the place . The agreement states that the interior should be redecorated every 7 years and the exterior painted every 5 years ( which should have been 2023). Allegedly.

Interesting, @Mylovelygreendress . So if he's broken the lease, maybe Charles could evict?.

And if he doesn’t do the maintenance, at the end if the 75 years agreement, who will be picking up the bill?

I'm guessing Charles?.
I hope not us!

He doesn’t for his own ds though BECAUSE he isn’t a working royal anymore.
So why should be pay for Andrew?

Charles doesn't pay for security for Harry because the taxpayer does.
The taxpayer doesn't pay for Andrew's security, so Charles does.

At one time he was cited as the third richest royal. He's always seen tooling around in top of the range luxury motors and Fergie has acquired a £5m mews house relatively recently

I don't think he is that wealthy by royal standards. When he was trade envoy or whatever that dubious role was with the sealed records, he clearly made money on the side (the sale of his house included).

His navy pension is small, he has expensive tastes and the gravy train of the envoy role is long over. I'm sure he has inheritances but I also suspect he ploughs through money quite quickly keeping up the facade.

A genuine question, who's paying for the staff for the royal lodge?