Page 15 | Andrew to lose Duke of York title

Flixon · 2025-10-17T17:36:14+00:00

News banner from the Torygraph saying Andrew and Sarah are losing their titles. They will be ‘put into Abeyance’ Andrew also to lose the Order of the Garter. Sarah will be known as Sarah Ferguson, he retains ‘Prince’ as he is the son of HM QE2. bloody good job !

AnAlpacaForChristmasPleaseSanta · 17/10/2025 21:07

binkie163 · 17/10/2025 20:57

Good, it couldn't happen to a more deserving, self entitled prick. Is he still allowed to host his shooting parties at Sandringham for income? I hope this is the start of things to come.
He will not be able to afford his house on his army pension so I hope Lownie keeps digging.

The fuck off country mansion house has been puzzling me this evening too, it's the last thing he has left to hang onto but surely he can't keep it now.

Also for some reason I was under the assumption that Sarah had been striped of her DOY title but just continued to use it regardless. To be honest, that's something I still wouldn't put it past her chancing.

lifeonmars100 · 17/10/2025 21:07

MrsLeonFarrell · 17/10/2025 20:58

The Gloucesters and the Duke of Kent are still working.

Show quote history

Doing what, on the tills at B and Q, rounding up stray trollies at Asda in all weathers? Cutting ribbons, shaking hands with us common folk and saying "what do you do?" is hardly back breaking onerous stuff

anamo · 17/10/2025 21:08

I often wonder why they need(ed) to grift for money. Are they profligate spenders, do they have to pay protection money, are they being blackmailed, are they gamblers, or just pure greedy? Surely A has inherited a chunk of money/assets the likes of which would be a lottery win for most of us mere mortals. Peppercorn rent on a big mansion also, and so on.

Baffles me.

CathyorClaire · 17/10/2025 21:08

CarrotCrusader · 17/10/2025 21:02

What have Beatrice and Eugenie done?

Show quote history

Accepted huge funds into bank accounts alongside sparkly gew-gaws while disengenuously batting their eyelids about the source/purpose and schmoozed Daddy's ME contacts relentlessly.

Nothing to see though.

SixSeven · 17/10/2025 21:08

CoffeeCantata · 17/10/2025 20:31

I think that title might be rested for a while….😂

Show quote history

York hopes so!

jumpingthehighjump · 17/10/2025 21:09

caringcarer · 17/10/2025 21:06

They lied about so many things and Meghan made fun of Queen Elizabeth ll

Show quote history

That pales into insignificance compared to Andrew and Sarah. And it was not making fun of her. Just your take on it

Seriously

MrsLeonFarrell · 17/10/2025 21:09

MasterBeth · 17/10/2025 21:04

I find this kind of post unfathomable.

The man was a dirty sleazeball yesterday and is a dirty sleazeball today.

"It removes him from any remaining status."

Anyone who believed this creep had any status yesterday isn't thinking for themselves and is beholden to the medieval royalist bullshit.

Show quote history

He clearly had status and he was clearly leveraging his remaining proximity to the King to obtain funding so he couldn't be removed from Royal Lodge.

Just because he is a sleaze doesn't mean he had no status, unfortunately many many people in power have done as much or worse than Andrew and still have status. Unfortunately power and status doesn't require moral probity.

caringcarer · 17/10/2025 21:09

MrsLeonFarrell · 17/10/2025 20:29

I think, because he only had girls, it will revert to the crown on his death if he hasn't formally given it up (and he may have done that going by the BBC). I doubt it will see the light of day again.

Show quote history

I read the Dukedom of York will be put in balance so that suggests he has formally relinquished it.

lifeonmars100 · 17/10/2025 21:10

IdaGlossop · 17/10/2025 20:57

Ex-wives keep the title, without the definite article in case the Duke remarries.

Show quote history

I am convinced that was one of the reasons that Fergie kept herself as close as possible to Andrew, the prospect of his remarrying must have worried her as she truly traded off her title

TheAutumnCrow · 17/10/2025 21:10

Peaknique · 17/10/2025 20:09

My point is that the King has not pulled the ultimate lever. He's done a fudge, just like his mother did.

Show quote history

I do get your point. Very much so.

Btw, if you substitute’Andrew’ for ‘Harry’ in this legal article you may enjoy its premise.

middletemplar.org.uk/to-strip-or-not-to-strip-prince-harrys-titles/

Tiredofbullsit · 17/10/2025 21:10

JemimaTab · 17/10/2025 20:31

The issue is more how do they pay for it - or who pays for it.

Show quote history

I don’t care. It has no direct impact on me,

Rhaidimiddim · 17/10/2025 21:11

MrsLeonFarrell · 17/10/2025 21:05

If Andrew had retired into a private life when the late Queen first removed him from royal duties. If he had refrained from pushing himself forward at every opportunity. I wonder if he would be in this position today.

Probably, given the Chinese-spy thing, Virginia's suicide and book, and the 100 Epstein emails. Those would have happened regardless of how Andrew behaved - it is his past catching up.with him.

I hope the Press swings to it and starts investigating the spineless politicians and civil servants who enabled ( and thus empowered) this boor for so long. That such people exist, who so want their own title so badly that they'll enable the Monarch's pet son, is a real problem with our current constitution.

wordler · 17/10/2025 21:11

Rhaidimiddim · 17/10/2025 21:04

All we need is for the Head of State to perform the functions required of the Head of State.

Other countries manage to get hospitals and libraries opened, natural disasters dealt with and major sporting events staged without having the neices and nephews and cousins and aunties/uncles of the current Head of State buzzing around bothering the general population.

Show quote history

Agreed - they can always get the extended family to dress up and provide a few warm bodies for the occasional traditional ceremonial event or garden party. The monarch can reward them with a nice lunch and good seats at Wimbledon/Ascot.

They don’t need to be on the payroll.

jumpingthehighjump · 17/10/2025 21:11

anamo · 17/10/2025 21:08

I often wonder why they need(ed) to grift for money. Are they profligate spenders, do they have to pay protection money, are they being blackmailed, are they gamblers, or just pure greedy? Surely A has inherited a chunk of money/assets the likes of which would be a lottery win for most of us mere mortals. Peppercorn rent on a big mansion also, and so on.

Baffles me.

You honestly need to read the Entitled book. It was completely and utterly gobsmacking.
I have never read anything like this grifting couple. Schmoozing anyone who would pay out, bankruptcies, trying to get money from anyone whoever they were (Epstein), not paying small traders anyone from hairdressers to personal trainers. It was honestly disgusting and it went on for decades

MrsLeonFarrell · 17/10/2025 21:13

tarheelbaby · 17/10/2025 21:06

I know lots of people on MN love to hate on Prince Andrew but isn't that convenient for the whole RF? No matter what any other royal does, none of them is anywhere near as bad ...
King Charles has never liked him so this works perfectly for him. The press has completely convicted Andrew (and tbf, he's dug his own grave) and that means that Charles can largely do as he likes (bar that trickly lease for Royal Lodge ...).

Back in the day, newspapers reported on Sarah's 'scandalous' behaviour as a contrast to Diana ...

Looking at the Garter list on wiki, Andrew is not on it. So he is not blocking a place. And Charles can appoint anyone he wants whenever he wants: it is in the monarch's gift.

(and for the Princess Royal, 'on the blower' is exactly how she'll be communicating; like her father before her)

The most important bit of any title is actually the HRH, as we all learned, when it was Diana's turn and more recently Catherine's. That is what puts a body to the front of the queue and means that others will curtsey.

I think, technically, Sarah would be Mrs Ferguson Mountbatten. I read somewhere in some etiquette book ages ago that divorcées use their unmarried surname and their (former) married surname.

And there's not much point sending a message that his (past) behavour is unacceptable. It's in the PAST and now he's pretty much confined to barracks so can't manage much more than discomfiting Prince William at funerals.

Show quote history

There are two types of Garter Knight. The Royal appointees aren't part of the main list, which is limited iirc to 24. Hence why he doesn't appear on it i think.

I really could use my brain for better things than obscure knowledge like that but I find it weirdly fascinating.

Futurehappiness · 17/10/2025 21:15

Rumpledandcrumpled · 17/10/2025 20:47

He’s not chosen it, that’s so naive, of course he didn’t chose this, you don’t seriously believe he decided not to use them, Charles has stripped him and allowed him to say it was him as the optics are better than Charles saying he did it,

it’s done, it’s not he is choosing not to today and can change his mind tomorrow, he can’t use them, again, ever.

Show quote history

He chose this outcome because it was probably the least bad option put to him. And no Charles can't strip any titles from RF members; he can request it be done but it requires an Act of Parliament.

It may seem unlikely that he would start using them again but as he still holds the title I think he could change his mind tomorrow and nobody could do anything about it. He may well still hope for a day when this 'blows over' and he can start using his titles again.

His alleged victim dead by suicide and yet what passes for consequences in Royal la la land is for Andrew to be pressured to stop using his titles; though he still keeps his big house and privileged existence. It is a total travesty.

MrsLeonFarrell · 17/10/2025 21:15

Rhaidimiddim · 17/10/2025 21:11

Probably, given the Chinese-spy thing, Virginia's suicide and book, and the 100 Epstein emails. Those would have happened regardless of how Andrew behaved - it is his past catching up.with him.

I hope the Press swings to it and starts investigating the spineless politicians and civil servants who enabled ( and thus empowered) this boor for so long. That such people exist, who so want their own title so badly that they'll enable the Monarch's pet son, is a real problem with our current constitution.

Show quote history

I agree. The deference is harmful and needs to go. Just be polite!

ThePollutedShadesOfPemberley · 17/10/2025 21:15

Zippedydodah · 17/10/2025 18:41

About bloody time!
Lownie’s book clearly shows who a repugnant pair they are, and their daughters aren’t far behind.

Remember the 'fake sheik' prank. SF couldn't keep her eyes off that briefcase of money. It was cartoonish.

anamo · 17/10/2025 21:16

jumpingthehighjump · 17/10/2025 21:11

You honestly need to read the Entitled book. It was completely and utterly gobsmacking.
I have never read anything like this grifting couple. Schmoozing anyone who would pay out, bankruptcies, trying to get money from anyone whoever they were (Epstein), not paying small traders anyone from hairdressers to personal trainers. It was honestly disgusting and it went on for decades

Show quote history

I have it reserved on Borrow Box, but it's going to take a while to get it!

I really need to find out WHY they needed to grift so badly. If the answer is in the book, I can't wait to read all about it.

SixSeven · 17/10/2025 21:16

jumpingthehighjump · 17/10/2025 21:06

Nowt.

They are no better. That sounds mean. They keep their heads down. Good. They have married well. Good
But their trips to Qatar, UAE, Saudi, Abu Dhabi is dodgy

Show quote history

If only Andrew had followed the lead of his big sister and not been so title hungry. I’d prefer his daughters not to have the Princess titles.

One of the Scandinavian royal families has recently decided that only those in the direct monarch line can use them, and that’s how it should be. I wonder if that’s William’s plan.

Tiredofbullsit · 17/10/2025 21:16

Rumpledandcrumpled · 17/10/2025 20:44

It’s a bad situation, Harry and Megan out, Andrew and Sarah out. Beatrice and Eugenie non working . Edward does sod all. Sophie does a bit, Anne does a lot, none of their kids working royals either, it’s a small group of working royals, until the Wales’s kids grow up, marry and have kids,

Edward does NOT do “sod all”!!

Daygloboo · 17/10/2025 21:17

Zippedydodah · 17/10/2025 18:41

About bloody time!
Lownie’s book clearly shows who a repugnant pair they are, and their daughters aren’t far behind.

I always got the impression Ferguson was much more conniving than her ditsy scatty public persona suggested. And as for Andy, he just seems like a joke.

jumpingthehighjump · 17/10/2025 21:18

Futurehappiness · 17/10/2025 21:15

He chose this outcome because it was probably the least bad option put to him. And no Charles can't strip any titles from RF members; he can request it be done but it requires an Act of Parliament.

It may seem unlikely that he would start using them again but as he still holds the title I think he could change his mind tomorrow and nobody could do anything about it. He may well still hope for a day when this 'blows over' and he can start using his titles again.

His alleged victim dead by suicide and yet what passes for consequences in Royal la la land is for Andrew to be pressured to stop using his titles; though he still keeps his big house and privileged existence. It is a total travesty.

Show quote history

Well said.

It just LOOKS like they royal family are doing something.

They're not

The only good outcome is that Sarah who has traded off her royal name for 30 years... now can't. But her name 'Sarah Ferguson' is so well known it probably won't make much difference.

But no more Duchess of York

No more 'Dining with the Duchess' cook books

nicepotoftea · 17/10/2025 21:18

anamo · 17/10/2025 21:08

I often wonder why they need(ed) to grift for money. Are they profligate spenders, do they have to pay protection money, are they being blackmailed, are they gamblers, or just pure greedy? Surely A has inherited a chunk of money/assets the likes of which would be a lottery win for most of us mere mortals. Peppercorn rent on a big mansion also, and so on.

Baffles me.

I'm sure he has plenty of money - but less money than the people who have private jets and super yachts, and he probably thinks he should be in that category by birth right.

MrsLeonFarrell · 17/10/2025 21:18

Futurehappiness · 17/10/2025 21:15

He chose this outcome because it was probably the least bad option put to him. And no Charles can't strip any titles from RF members; he can request it be done but it requires an Act of Parliament.

It may seem unlikely that he would start using them again but as he still holds the title I think he could change his mind tomorrow and nobody could do anything about it. He may well still hope for a day when this 'blows over' and he can start using his titles again.

His alleged victim dead by suicide and yet what passes for consequences in Royal la la land is for Andrew to be pressured to stop using his titles; though he still keeps his big house and privileged existence. It is a total travesty.

Show quote history

Because of the China stuff I suspect if he does try to use his titles the government will go to the trouble of removing them legally, assuming he hasn't actually given them back anyway.

I wish they could make him move till a smaller property but from everything I've read the Crown Estate is stuck unless he breaks the terms of his lease.