What reform if any is needed in relation to Crown Estate Property? Subletting of royal properties currently in the news.....

Honestly, I think our Royals own far too much property in the UK!

In my opinion, only one “professional” working property is needed for the King etc to receive dignitaries and work from, ie Buckingham Palace, along with all its traditional, then one residential home for each working royal and their families.

Nothing should be sublet to earn themselves more cash.

All remaining properties should be let to ordinary people on long safe leases.

All those flats etc in the mall, Kensington Palace etc shouldn’t be “grace and favour” additional homes for anyone!

Places like Windsor Castle can be opened to the public, as I understand it is already, and a few reception rooms and the kitchen can be used for Royal events and then rented out for other paid events by professional organisations.

I’m sure we, or the National Trust, can easily make use of all the other properties left empty half the year.

Just saying….

I don't want to lose the Royal family but they have far too much wealth. The king and queen and the immediate heirs should be maintained but they own so much property and gain income from it.
I would like to see their wealth vastly reduced in future.

Oh for goodness sake. What a miserable perspective to take. Look what fun they have in communist countries...oh wait..

My opinion, for what it is worth on a subject like this is, keep things as they were say on the 90s.

If it wasnt broke in say 1990, then dont change things now.

As Dr.Prescott said too complicated to understand, as is everything about the government and the traditions that surround the Royal Family.
We are Nation who doesn't like change but are our laws and traditions are antiquated. No government is going to change thing, it would take a lifetime and probably be just as complicated at the end.

Aveline

Oh for goodness sake. What a miserable perspective to take. Look what fun they have in communist countries...oh wait..

Are we a bit too “bah humbug”?

It’s not like I’ve said lock ‘em up in the tower and off with their heads 🤣🤣🤣🤣

fancythat

My opinion, for what it is worth on a subject like this is, keep things as they were say on the 90s.

If it wasnt broke in say 1990, then dont change things now.

You mean you’re ok with all the non-working royals having free lovely apartments for their own personal use in London?

Sorry to disagree, but I’m not!

I don’t think I’d want to live in a drafty old palace overrun with mice, which I gather is the case with Buckingham Palace! I do think the RF need other bases, too, it’s not all about London.

The royal firm is gradually being slimmed down, and rightly so.

Prince William has already made changes in the Duchy of Cornwall, and will continue to do so.

I am a royalist and happy to see the changes being implemented by the royals themselves, we shall by the next King have a modern royal family suited to the 21st century.

Would it be simplest for them all to pay inheritance tax. I hope council tax and where relevant business rates are paid on all these properties.

AGAA4 who should have their wealth reduce, Anne, the Edinburghs?

Anniebach

AGAA4 who should have their wealth reduce, Anne, the Edinburghs?

All of them.

There is an awful lot of misinformation going round on this subject

To begin with AMW paid £7.5 million for the lease on the Royal Lodge, that included money on repairs. That is the same land tenure as millions of people in this country. Leasehold tenure means you can act as if you own the property, are responsible for all repairs, but have to pay for another lease or hand it back in good order when the lease expires. This means that AMW was quite free to rent out the cottages to people, who I understood were employees or ex-employees.

The Crown Estate is a vast, independent commercial property and land portfolio in the UK. While technically owned by the reigning monarch "in right of the Crown," it is not their private property. Instead, it is managed by an independent board of commissioners, with all net profits going directly to the UK Treasury to benefit the public.

Various members of the RF do own private properties but their ownership and management are an entirely personal matter. Sandringham and Balmoral properties owned by the king as a private individual. The five largest property owning individuals in this country are: Duke of Bucleugh, Anders Holch Povlsen, Duke of Westminster, Duchy of Cornwall, Earl of Lonsdale. This list was drawn up before the Elizabeth II died. She was the 19th person on the list. James Dyson is the 13th largest personal land owner. The top 3 landowners are: The Forestry Commission. National Trust and Ministry of Defence.
tlio.org.uk/the-uks-50-biggest-landowners-revealed-lovemoney-com/

As I understand all the Royals pay a market rent or have bought a lease and the King pays the rent for AMW's daughters.

I think the whole thing is a storm in an eggcup to play to the current fashion for denigrating the RF. I am no flag waving royalist, but I like to know the facts before I jump on a band wagon and sing. The facts here seem to be perfectly normal for how house tenure, whether leasehold or rented works in this country.

Anne and Edward were given their family homes as wedding presents

"The British taxpayer does not owe palatial homes to Charles's extended family. Why are we making homes available at huge discounts to Andrew's daughters, or the late Queen's cousins?"

"Charles and William are billionaires, avoiding inheritance and other taxes, taking personal incomes from public property portfolios in excess of £50m a year. The royals can pay for their own homes."

"The Crown Estate and royal palace property portfolio is state property. It should all be used for the benefit of the public, not the private enrichment of the royals."

"The NAO's report raises far more questions than it answers. MPs need to seize this moment to push for radical reform, including removing all royals but the monarch from publicly owned accommodation."

Aveline

Oh for goodness sake. What a miserable perspective to take. Look what fun they have in communist countries...oh wait..

Oh behave. There’s a middle ground between constitutional monarchy and communism.

winterwhite

Would it be simplest for them all to pay inheritance tax. I hope council tax and where relevant business rates are paid on all these properties.

This would seem an answer.

If royals sublet the properties on the estates they are renting that is fine with me so long as they charge tenants a rent which covers only the wear and tear and redecoration of the house should they leave. Most landowners do that, and let out the houses to people who work for them.

Not far from us, within Richmond Park, is a large house (I think called a cottage!) that was and possibly still is, the home of Princess Alexandra. However her husband, IIRC Angus Ogilvie. had apparently refused freebies and had paid what was at the time a huge amount for a lease of the property.

What will happen to it once Princess A. no longer needs it, is anybody’s guess. IMO it must be a bit of a pain living within the park, though, since the vehicle gates are closed from roughly dusk to dawn*, and all access is denied at night during the deer cull season.

For anyone wondering why they need to cull them, it’s because the numbers would soon be too great for the amount of pasture available, and there are no natural predators, though of course a deer is occasionally killed by some stupid driver failing to take care and observe the 20 mph speed limit.

*To add, though of course anyone entitled to live there will have some means of driving in and out, out of hours.

I think, quite fairly speaking, it’s the extent of the properties available for their use.

London is our capital City, and has our parliament residing there too, it’s quite reasonable to expect the Royal’s to use this building for all royal functions and visiting dignitaries. It’s certainly big enough. If it’s not been well maintained, shame on them.

Many of their state owned and “personal” properties are already opening to the public for partial visits, all will have shops and “eateries” and must make good income.

It’s utterly ridiculous for the King to pay the rent on Andrew’s daughter’s apartments, they are not working Royals, they both worked commercially and by normal standards neither they nor their husbands are hard up.

I don’t wish to “do away” with the Royal's, nor do I expect them to have to live as the majority of us live. I’d hate to be a member of the Royal family, despite their riches and privileges, our Kate Queen had no life really, most of it was spent “doing her duty”.

I simply think there are still too many being funded who simply don’t need to be.

As for those entitled ** like Andrew, I have no time for him and I would imagine his siblings are both deeply ashamed and a little disgruntled.

I cannot compare business tycoons like Dyson with the RF. Dyson worked for his wealth and (I’m assuming) pays for all his land and property himself. The RF were simply born into the RF, hardly an achievement.

How lucky are you, Witzend, living close to Richmond Park. I love the sound of the deer during rutting season! Can you hear them from home?
Anyway, as you were 😁

Perhaps the King paying for Beatrice and Eugenie’s London accommodation was part of the deal to get Andrew out of Royal Lodge?

I’ve no idea how long he’s been paying it, but I’m sure there has been ‘concessions’ on both sides to get AMW to upsticks to Sandringham.

Cossy who are the many being funded ? How many are entitled? The. Late Queen paid for her 2 granddaughters. Seems the King is honouring his mother wishes ?