So now we have it. Not only was the former prince Andrew paying a peppercorn rent – in other words no rent at all – for his 30-room mansion in Windsor, but for more than two decades he was also presumably pocketing any surplus income from subletting three properties on the estate. Even more astonishing, perhaps, is the fact that he wasn’t breaking any rules.
It was allowed under the terms of his lease. No wonder he had to be almost dragged kicking and screaming out of his cushy accommodation at Royal Lodge.
The National Audit Office (NAO) report into the rental arrangements of properties owned by the Crown Estate or managed by the Royal Household is revealing – and alarming. What an unholy mess it all is.
Some aspects seem unfathomable. Having accepted the need for independent assessment of the market value of the properties, the household decided that the royal occupants should pay only around 60 per cent of that rent because of the security restraints of the location. But surely most who want to live there are people of notable wealth, who could afford the market rent?
Granted, some tenants – including the disgraced former duke, and the Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh at Bagshot Park – had paid an upfront premium for their homes. But what a handsome return they got: a virtually rent-free life with the bonus of income from subletting parts of these vast estates. It’s understood that the properties at Royal Lodge were sublet to active or retired staff at a rate to cover their running costs and maintenance. The details, however, remain sketchy. So if this is truly the case, let’s see the figures.
