Does King Charles plan to ‘seize’ QEII’s corgis from Prince Andrew?

In my opinion, one of the craziest parts of “the unroyaling” of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was the fact that Sarah Ferguson will not be allowed to keep QEII’s corgis once she and Andrew move out of Royal Lodge. Andrew got the corgis for his mother in the final years of her life, because he wanted to cheer her up after Prince Philip’s passing. When QEII died, the corgis came to live with Andrew and Fergie, and Fergie was seemingly the one taking care of the dogs and using the dogs to remind everyone of her connection to the late queen. While I didn’t realize it at the time, that “reminder” annoyed the f–k out of King Charles, who has apparently ordered the corgis to stay “within the family.” Initially, I thought that meant that the dogs would go with Andrew and live in Norfolk. But according to Rob Shuter, Charles wants his late mother’s dogs.

There are still so many questions surrounding Queen Elizabeth II’s corgis after Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor lost his royal title.

A new report from British journalist Rob Shuter claimed that King Charles III is “preparing to seize” the dogs from Andrew, 65. The #ShuterScoop Substack alleged that Charles does not think Andrew is “capable” of taking care of the pups.

Charles allegedly feels the dogs, named Muick and Sandy, need “more stable home — and better judgment around them,” per Shuter’s newsletter. A senior courtier alleged that Elizabeth would “never” have left her dogs with Andrew’s ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, “and Charles knows that better than anyone,” Shuter reported.

Us Weekly understands that the corgis will remain within the royal family.

[From Us Weekly]

If I’m being honest, I think Andrew is probably a terrible dog-parent and I actually thought it was a bad idea to send the corgis off to Norfolk. But the idea of the king “seizing” the dogs is incredibly weird. Camilla and Charles already have at least one dog – Camilla adopted Moley from a shelter this year, after her dog Beth died. Is Charles going to bring in Muick and Sandy to live at Clarence House, Highgrove and Windsor Castle? I don’t know, would it be so wrong to just let Sarah keep the dogs?

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images, Sarah Ferguson’s IG.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

19 Responses to “Does King Charles plan to ‘seize’ QEII’s corgis from Prince Andrew?”

  1. Ali says:

    I can’t stand Sarah but I love dogs and if the dogs have bonded with her and are being well taken care of, they should stay with her. Charles will die before they will and they’ll have to be rehomed again.

  2. 2131Jan says:

    This feels like a power move, “I will just because I can” thing. I think staff took care of the dogs, walking and feeding, as well as giving them attention. None of them seems to use pets as anything other than an accessory.

  3. Henny Penny says:

    The dogs should stay with Sarah, if they are attached to her, and Andrew should be forced to cooperate with US law enforcement. All of these performative “punishments” are ridiculous.

  4. GMHQ says:

    These people really have the most misplaced priorities, especially the monarch. Charles has no idea what the job of the sovereign is. If you listen to him, it’s playing with pieces on the royal real estate chessboard… evicting the Sussexes, spending years trying to intimidate Andrew into moving out of Royal Lodge until events finally caught up with the mess, “reigning” over the future housing of a couple of dogs. It seems the job has little to do with protecting the constitution and more with playing dress up and escorting the side piece to ceremonial photo ops. These people are making the monarchy collapse on their own. Republicans can just sit back and watch it all end.

  5. A custody battle over the corgis lol. I can see why he doesn’t want them with Fergie because she doesn’t have a permanent home. I’m sure Chuckles will not be keeping them with him per say he probably will have staff be the caretakers for the dogs.

    • Yvette says:

      @Susan Collins … I wonder if Sarah requested and received a stipend to help care for the dogs and Charles wants to stop the stipend by removing the dogs? I was surprised by Sarah jumping in right away volunteering to adopt the dogs. Mainly because I’ve never seen the Yorks pictured with dogs before, like with the other royals.

  6. Sunniside up says:

    The dogs should be left with the person that has looked after them ever since the Queen died. To take them away would be unnecessarily unkind to the dogs.

  7. Amy Bee says:

    Is this even true? Why didn’t Charles take the dogs when the Queen died?

  8. KC says:

    Team Dog. Poor things.

  9. Deborah1 says:

    The irony is that apparently Andrew doesn’t even like corgis after one of QEII’s dogs bit him several years ago. Charles probably knows this which is why he doesn’t want Andrew to have Muick and Sandy. Sarah Ferguson already has five other dogs – Norfolk terriers – and her living arrangements are uncertain. So who in the RF is going to take care of these corgis? Charles doesn’t have much longer on this earth but I can’t see W&K doing it. Corgis unfortunately have a bit of a reputation.

  10. Tessa says:

    This reminds me of monty python Spanish inquisition episode where a punishment is sitting in a comfy chair until noon. Charles seizing corgis could be part of the sketch. Charles should leave the dogs alone.

  11. Margo says:

    SEIZE THE CORGIS!!!!!!

  12. jferber says:

    Charles shows more concern for the dogs than his own American grandchildren. I get it’s a power mood, but still.

  13. AMB says:

    And THIS is why QEII said she didn’t want any more dogs after her last one died. If they’d respected her wishes they wouldn’t have this kerfuffle.

Commenting Guidelines

Read the article before commenting.

We aim to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Do not engage with trolls, contrarians or rude people. Comment "troll" and we will see it.

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment after you have read the article

Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment