Princess Beatrice & Eugenie are part of a huge fraud case involving their dad

Prince Andrew is a degenerate who was best buds with two human traffickers, and he has been credibly accused of rape. But did you know that Andrew’s finances have been a f–king mess for decades? Andrew and his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson are two of the biggest scammers ever. They’ve scammed millions off of businesses, friends and associates. They both get mysterious “loans” which they never pay back. No one knows how Andrew paid for the Swiss chalet he ended up selling to “pay off” Virginia Giuffre, nor do we know how much money Queen Elizabeth has given him over the years to hush up his victims and pay for his legal fees. So, all of that was was a huge question mark, although the financial fraud has been largely ignored by the British media. Did you also know that his daughters Beatrice and Eugenie are involved in his messy finances? It’s true. From a Telegraph exclusive:

Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie have been dragged into a multi-million pound fraud case that has embroiled their father, amid claims they also received money. The Telegraph can reveal that a £750,000 payment transferred into the Duke of York’s account on the orders of an alleged Turkish fraudster was described to bankers as a wedding gift for his eldest daughter, Princess Beatrice. Princess Eugenie was also paid £25,0000 on the orders of Selman Turk, a former Goldman Sachs banker accused of stealing £40 million from Nebahat Evyap Isbilen, a 77-year-old Turkish millionairess. The York family have all been named in a High Court battle by Mrs Isbilen to retrieve her missing millions from Mr Turk.

In proceedings revealed by The Telegraph, the Duke is alleged to have received a total of £1.1 million from Mrs Isbilen’s funds, while his ex-wife Sarah, Duchess of York has received £225,000. Neither Princess Beatrice nor Princess Eugenie are believed to have had any knowledge of their parents’ dealings with Mr Turk, nor knowingly corresponded with him in any way.

The Duchess is understood to be distraught at the thought of her daughters being unwittingly dragged into the case, particularly as a result of their parents’ actions. However, The Telegraph understands that she does not plan to hand back the money she received, because she believes it was paid to her legitimately and that a company she was acting for as a brand ambassador is responsible for any debt.

In a statement on Friday evening, Princess Eugenie said: “On 31 March 2022 I received a letter from solicitors Peters & Peters representing their client Nebahat Evyap Isbilen in her claim against a Mr Selman Turk, and various companies. I know neither Mrs Isbilen nor Mr Turk (nor any other details of the claim) and I was surprised to receive this letter, which asked me to explain two payments made to my bank account in October 2019, which I understood to be gifts from a long-standing family friend to assist with the cost of a surprise party for my mother, Sarah, Duchess of York’s sixtieth birthday.

“In early October 2019 I had received a call from our family friend saying that he wanted to make a financial contribution towards my mother’s birthday party to assist with the catering costs. I suggested that any contribution could be made directly to the caterers, but in the event provided my account details to which two payments were made totalling £25,000, which I then transferred on to the company organising my mother’s party. I am now consulting with my lawyers who I have asked to respond to Peters & Peters on my behalf to assist in their inquiries.”

[From The Telegraph]

Eugenie’s statement… results in more questions than answers. Someone just called her up and offered to contribute £25,000 for the catering for Fergie’s birthday party and Eugenie first insisted that the money go to the caterers but “in the event provided my account details…”?? Whew, that’s a horrible look. I mean, it’s not that shocking that Beatrice and Eugenie are involved (to a lesser degree, but still involved) in their parents’ financial mess, but still… I thought Eugenie was more straight-arrow. Beatrice absolutely seems like her mother’s daughter though. I remember when Beatrice was jobless and just running around partying for more than a year and no one knew how she was supporting herself. The Yorks are scammers. Period. And you gotta hate-respect the fact that Fergie is like “this scammed money is MINE, I’m not giving it back.”

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red Instar, Instagram.

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

248 Responses to “Princess Beatrice & Eugenie are part of a huge fraud case involving their dad”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Alexandria says:

    This entire wretched family always needs a scapegoat *cough Cat 4 disaster tour* because at the heart of it it has no integrity. Good luck to the next royal generation.

    • The Hench says:

      Indeed. And what are the chances that this latest switch of stories to Andrew’s dodgy finances came via a phone call from KP to distract the media from worrying over the disaster tour? Or do we think the phone call happened but was revenge for Andy putting himself front and centre at the Memorial by escorting TQ to her seat?

      • windyriver says:

        I think it’s to torpedo Andrew’s latest attempt to “rehabilitate” himself back into a public facing role, which was met with pretty widespread disgust outside the cozy royal bubble. I’m very curious what members of other royal houses thought of that display.

        It is also a distraction from the disaster tour but really that’s old news by now. Didn’t the tabloids already move on to H&M going to the Beckham wedding?

      • TigerMcQueen says:

        I think this is from Chuck to let Andrew know that, nope, he’s not going to be able to rehabilitate himself. The FK can be quite ruthless and his disdain for both his younger brother and his brother’s ex wife is well known. Throwing both Bea and Eugenie out to the wolves is his way of telling Andrew (and Sarah) to back off or it will get uglier.

      • Athena says:

        I don’t think all things lead back to KP. I’m sure the DF was aware of this lawsuit because they have people monitoring court filings and kept it under wrap for a good occasion. Andrew and his mother gave them the opening when they showed up arm and arm at Phillip’s memorial. This is the establishment (non-royal) trying to put Andrew back in his box.

    • Elizabeth Regina says:

      The all offense and no charm tour of the ‘colonies’ was a rude shock to FFK and his mannequin. They need new distractions and scapegoats but Andrew as vile as he is, will not go down without a fight. He is ready to drag everyone into the mud with him. The blacony scene at the jubbly will be VERY interesting.

      • harpervalleypta says:

        The BRF never learned one of the basic rules of PR: if one of them looks bad, they ALL look bad.

        That’s why you won’t see ads from airlines about competitors being unsafe. They know that will backfire and people will think ALL airliners are dangerous. Same thing with princes: if you say one of them is a crook, people are going to think they all are crooks. (Which seems to be true, but C and W are doing their best to make sure the public definitely thinks that.)

  2. Duchess of Hazard says:

    Wow. Just… wow.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      That was my reaction……WOW!


      Eugenie yes, as I think her husband would be into some shady dealings. Beatrice, no. I have a hard time imagining Beatrice would be caught up in this! Fergie ABSOLUTELY f#cking would!!!

      • Elizabeth Regina says:

        I think they are all in it. From the queen to the littlest one. It’s all they know. I’m loving the briefings from all the houses against each other. Bring on the mutually assured destruction of the House of Windsor.

      • Harla says:

        I feel the exact opposite, I could see Bea and Edo doing something shady but not Eugenie and Jack. I don’t watch soap operas but I sure do enjoy watching the BRF implode one scandal at a time 🤣

      • Nivz says:

        Did you get their names (understandably) mixed up? Eugenie is the one who visited Montecito.

      • Duch says:

        @Harla, I’m with you and I wonder if @BothSides meant that too. Edo is the one folks kind of side-eye, isn’t it? Eugénie does seem straight arrow, and this speedy, informative response strikes me v similarly to H&M’s statements. I wonder if H gave her this recommendation to get on top of the story quickly – I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s the same law or PR firm that helped craft the messaging.

        Anyway it’s effective for me (plus the mutual support with her cousin – that sways me too).

      • windyriver says:

        @BSN, are you mixing up Eugenie and Beatrice?

      • BothSidesNow says:

        I am so sorry but I mixed the sisters up!!!

        Beatrice, YES!! Eugenie, NO!!! Sorry, as I had not had ANY coffee!!!!

        YES!!! I mixed up the sisters!! I had not had my coffee yet!! So sorry!! I am having some now!!

      • AnnaKist says:

        I have no idea if the York girls are involved, or to what extent. The parents, however, are as dodgy as feck. These shenanigans have been going on for years, and despite their divorce, Fergie and The Lech continue/d to work as a double act , for scamming purposes and whatever else took their fancy)I. The Swiss chalet questions were always rearing their heads over the years, with never a satisfactory explanation.

        I’m sure many readers can also remember Ferguson being secretly recorded as she attempted to do deals to “provide access to the Duke of York”. For a (huge) fee, of course. They are a pair of utterly despicable scumbags, and if they’ve dragged their daughters into their filthy dealings to try and obfuscate the truth about their scamming, well, they are far worse than we -imagined.
        I’ve been waiting for years for the full extent of their dodgy deals to be exposed, and hope their arses are dragged so hard that not even Betty woukdcrecognise her golden child.

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        I agree. I felt Bea was obvious and Eig was not.
        Mostly because Bea stunts a lot to gain favor from her family like wear her grandmother’s wedding dress.

        And Eugenie is tough because she has strong association to Harry and Meghan so we want so badly to believe she is honest and good.

        I think Eug either did it because it was the norm, because no one with that wealth asks too many questions and has others deal with funds or because a family member (her parents?) asked her to handle it that way.

      • Debbie says:

        To all those who still can’t quite tell the York daughters apart, boy do I understand because even after reading the above story I still can’t tell who is who. I wish someone would explain why “the duchess” said that it’s unfortunate that the York daughters had to be involved even if indirectly because of their parents. Does it mean that either Andrew or Sarah were involved with this fraudster and gave him the daughters’ names? If so, it’s appalling that they would involve their daughters that way. It’s bad enough to use one of them as an alibi in the Woking Pizza Express nonsense but to expose them to this degree is really terrible.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Old family friend just calls up to say hey, I want to contribute tens of thousands to your mother’s birthday party, what’s your bank account number? And you give it? Over the phone? Or, old family friend wants to contribute hundreds of thousands to your wedding & you said great, thanks! And give your account number? What kind of world do these people live in where that’s considered normal?

      • Moxylady says:

        Actually this is the part – as a millennial – that I totally get. It’s basically like them asking for your PayPal or your venmo.
        My group of friends crowd sources for presents for each other’s kiddos or when one of us is having a tough time etc. And for birthday parties or food. 🤷🏻‍♀️🤷🏻‍♀️🤷🏻‍♀️

      • Athena says:

        That’s exactly what I was thinking. It’s not only 750,000 pounds, that’s the amount he initially received and returned, there was an additional 350,000 paid to his account. He did not return the 350,000. Basically he thought it was perfectly logical for a total stranger to offer him 1 million pounds towards his daughter’s wedding. The wedding celebration was to take place at the Chapel in St. James palace, the reception was to take place in the gardens of Buckingham palace. The reception was a gift from the Queen, so we were told back them. The church, the cars, the reception are free, what’s left, flowers and the dress? For that they took 1 million pounds from a stranger.
        We only know about this because of the lawsuit, image all the other monetary “wedding gifts” the public is not aware of.

      • BeanieBean says:

        But @Moxylady: for PayPal, you just need that person’s email address, not their bank account & routing numbers. I’ve never used Venmo, but I expect it’s the same thing. She gave out her bank account number directly, this wasn’t through PayPal. (Hmm, I wonder if they have reporting rules about large transfers of cash; probably.)

      • AmelieOriginal says:

        Venmo has a weekly sending limit of $4,999 for person to person and Paypal’s daily limit is $10,000. So she would have had to provide her banking information for such a large transfer. I guess the family friend could have done it via PayPal in a few separate transactions. I don’t blame Eugenie for this but it does seem unwise and she should have let the guy pay the caterers directly.

      • The Recluse says:

        No one in my world does that or can hope to get that kind of money from anyone.
        My mind is boggled.
        Unless it’s a wedding for a very large family and group of friends, I can’t imagine spending that much money for a birthday party! Grifters.
        Eugenie needs to move to California or New York and live on her own terms asap.

      • Elvie says:

        Having just spent the last two years in the UK, the bank details is very common. UK banking systems are not like North American and rather than give an email address to share money you can deposit directly into a bank account. I have all of my best friends set up in my UK bank account with their sort codes and bank account numbers so we could pay each other money when ordering take out or someone picking up a tab or sharing expenses for birthday presents, so its not strange at all in that respect.

        Now, accepting money from someone you don’t actually know … weird.

  3. equality says:

    25,000 just for catering? That must have been some party. I cannot even imagine spending that much on an entire birthday party.

    • Elizabeth Phillips says:


    • Trimdownmnrchyboring says:

      Well they must eat very fancy sandwiches

    • surveysays says:

      They should have gone to Party Pieces and gotten the family discount.

    • Elizabeth Regina says:

      You need to remember that this is a different world. I remember a photographer friend photographing a party where she was paid less than one bottle of wine. They would rather serve £1000 bottles of wine and pay over £500 a head for food to impress friends than pay her properly. She learned a big lesson on negotiation and saying no that day.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        I feel so bad for people like your friend!! I have read a great deal of “influencers” wanting everything for FREE!! And it angers me to the pit of my stomach!! I had hired many photographers and have never haggled them in their fees, as it’s their livelihood!!!

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        You can always negotiate! Some will throw out a number if you sound desperate or feel they can scale up their fee massively because of the event. It really depends on the person.

  4. Em says:

    Eugenie better leave that mess and move to the US when Liz dies because they won’t stop throwing them under the bus, I don’t care for Beatrice because she and her husband are thirsty af

    • equality says:

      Curious why you think Bea and husband are “thirsty”. Her husband is worth millions from his own family and real estate business and she has a job. He and Bea bought their own house in the Cotswolds near his family. I could picture Bea and Eugenie both not having much to do with royal things after TQ is gone.

      • vs says:

        Her husband is worth millions yet they still live on a crown property? I highly doubt those “millions” people keep talking about! he might be comfortable, yes but worth a lot, nope!
        Eugenie better pack her family and move to the US….let the rest devour each other! hopefully Andrew also starts talking and leaking against KP and CH….
        I am so grateful H took Meg out of the nest of vipers…no tiara or jewelry is worth a peace of mind!

      • equality says:

        As I just said in my comment, Bea and Edo now live on an estate in the Cotswolds that they bought; they don’t still live on crown property.

      • vs says:

        Ok, I didn’t think they had moved out of H’s old pad yet….

      • Nanea says:

        I don’t think Bea and Edo ever bought the property in the Cotswolds.

        They’re papped in the vicinity of St. James’s Palace much too often for that.

        And the Italian property that the rags said was reportedly owned by Count Mozzarella does belong to a cousin’s family.

      • equality says:

        Eugenie is the one who lives in H&M’s house.

      • vs says:

        @equality—i know that Eugenie is the one living in H&M house….but Beatrice used to live with her husband in H’s old pad as well….anyway my point is her husband is not as wealthy as advertised

      • Jay says:

        I think it’s Eugenie and her family that were leasing Frogmore cottage. I don’t know if Beatrice still has her apartment in the royal lodge, but supposedly she’s been on hand to “support” her father, so, it sounds like she’s there at least some of the time.

        I don’t know if Bea’s husband is really worth millions or not – with real estate, it’s so hard to tell, right? The reported value of his company is not necessarily his personal wealth, and that’s without dividing it with his ex/business partner and various investors. He could in fact be pretty cash poor, or possibly living beyond their means. A royal lifestyle doesn’t come cheap!

        And even being a rich person wouldn’t protect you from being tempted by a “gift” of £750,000.

      • Athena says:

        Beatrice and Edo most likely live in her apartment in St. James Palace instead of his apartment because of the built in security that comes with St. James palace.

      • Jaded says:

        @vs – Eugenie and Jack live in Frogmore Cottage, H&M’s place and pay them rent on the lease which he bought out. Bea and Edo pay rent on their apartment in St. James palace as they’re not working royals.

      • Debbie says:

        Wasn’t there a story a year ago that Fergie had proposed a business deal with Edo the real estate person? I read that he was all in, until he withdrew his name from consideration. Then the story went on to say that Fergie had tried the same thing with the other husband who wears glasses (Jack?). I read that Jack was in business with Fergie, then he dissolved their company because it became sketchy, or it seemed to be draining his money while Fergie (a so-called-partner) was not investing any of her own money.

    • Snuffles says:

      Exactly. They should see the writing on the wall. They are being set up as the new family scapegoats. And Andrew is way too volatile.

      The York girls better pull out now.

      • Trimdownmnrchyboring says:

        Absolutely right @snuffles. This family absolutely has no value and their press are hyenas circling in famine. I can smell the cambridges footprints. This type of monarchying is not my type of vibe at all.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        Yes, @ Snuffles!! The York sisters are now grown which gives them the opportunity to become scapegoats for their parents!!

        It’s all fair as long as you are grown in that entire family!!!

        Imagine having to move thousands of mile away to get away from your conniving family!! This family has NO shame!!!

      • BeanieBean says:

        And change their bank accounts. And get new phones/phone numbers.

      • SIde Eye says:

        Absolutely right @snuffles. Those young women need to move FAR AWAY and separate all of their finances from their parents, their parents’ charities and business dealings. This is only going to get worse as time goes on. Andrew feels no way about throwing his own children under the bus. We all saw that when he used one daughter to cover up his crimes against Virginia with his stupid Pizza Express alibi. Just gross.

      • Alexandria says:

        The thing is HM can’t even make proper scapegoats, they have no real scandals. The rest of this family have many alleged scandals a responsible government and media can take on. Eugenie and Bea are not totally disentangled from this family’s affairs and unfortunately their parents are the biggest and most obvious grifters. They should really watch out and I already feel sorry for the children.

        As for the rest of the younger generation, it’s a matter of time.

        Now it’s like some kinda messed up standoff. Andrew and Fergie have dirt on them and they can’t afford to make these two too desperate cos lord knows Chuck, Egg and Mumbles Middleton have their own shit to cover. I’ll even say Michael of Kent is a risk. Let the games begin.

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        This is just another reason why Harry was smart to remove his family from the BRF. You are a scapegoat. And your children have targets on their backs. The choice to have a child in the fold of that family is a guaranteed future of being tormented in the press to make sure the heirs never feel consequences for being bad people.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Alexandria, exactly! The Sussexes are not involved in any genuine scandals, which is why we keep hearing over and over again about their 100 bathrooms and how Harry is “blindsiding” or “disappointing” the BRF. They keep repeating the same crap because they’ve already scraped the bottom of the barrel, and that’s still all they’ve got.

  5. Noki says:

    All these royals who are not a part of the ‘working royals’ group still seem to live very comfortable lives. I want to know where they get their money from,no disrespect to their occupations but working in art galleries will not afford the lifestyles they lead.

    • Cerys says:

      Yes, I’d love to know this too. The finances of the whole royal family need to be investigated by an independent body.

      • Athena says:

        They have very rich friends and they tag along for free, they don’t have to pay for the seat in the private jet, or their room on the friend’s yacht. They’re not paying full price for the clothes they wear. And those friends get to claim royal connection with visits to KP, BP, Sandringham, Balmoral as payments.

      • Wiglet Watcher says:

        You just described William as well. He famously tagged along and insisted his vacations be covered by his wealthy friends or the resorts he stayed at. This is the mindset. Because of who they are everything should be free to them.

    • Nada que esteja encoberto que não venha ser revelado.Esse castelo está ruído faz tempoe A rainha de fazendo de demente.Ainda bem que a Meghan saiu fora dessa ilegalidade.
      Tudo da Meghan e com suor e trabalho

    • anotherlily says:

      Some of them have inherited wealth. Many people benefit from money and property left to them by relatives. In the case of the aristocracy property such as inherited titles, is governed by law and sometimes includes land along with buildings and other property secured by trusts. However, the property is not always shared equally.

      In the Queen’s family her Gloucester and Kent cousins are not especially wealthy. The Kents in particular have long been the poor relations. The country house and much of the property inherited by the Duke of Kent has been sold. His younger brother Prince Michael sold his own relatively small, country house and Princess Alexandra has spent most of her life in a house owned by the Queen and leased by Alexandra’s late husband, Angus Ogilvie. Those with official duties receive a stipend from the Sovereign Grant and some others live in royal residences, officially paying market rents.

      Younger generations of former ‘landed gentry’ may have no inherited wealth and simply do what most people do and work for a living. Having influential connections may help in some cases.

  6. Amy Bee says:

    Basically the Yorks have been running a cash for access scheme for years. It does ask the question how much money Andrew got for both of his daughters’ weddings. I wonder if the Met will investigate them.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      They can investigate all they want as they will be blocked every step of the way. TQ, and certainly Chaz, are not going to allow their shady business dealings become public knowledge!!

    • FancyPants says:

      How did he need money for Beatrice’s wedding? There were like 5 people there at a private chapel and she got her dress and her jewels from grandmummy.

      • BeanieBean says:

        I found that curious, too. They got a huge chunk of change for what seemed to be a very low-key pandemic wedding. What was all that money for???? Although I have seen it described as a ‘gift’ for her wedding. In lieu of a toaster, I guess.

      • Becks1 says:

        Wonder if that was before the scaled-down version? Remember it was supposed to be a reception outdoors at BP before COVID hit.

      • AmelieOriginal says:

        This was probably for the big wedding Beatrice originally envisioned before COVID forced her to scale it down to just close family. Remember she got engaged in September 2019.

    • anotherlily says:

      What would the Met investigate? Cash for access isn’t illegal.

  7. Snuffles says:

    At this point, I’m 100% certain almost everyone in the royal family is grifting, taking bribes, cash for access, pay for play, money laundering through their “foundations”, and skimming money off the top of donations and the sovereign grant.

    I swear they pocket as much money they can for themselves and squirrel it away in off shore bank accounts and complicated tax schemes to hide the money. Their motto in life is why pay for anything ourselves when we can get others to pay for it.

    It doesn’t help that only Charles and the Queen have access to legitimate money making opportunities through their Duchy’s and control the purse strings of most of the family. They are literally operating a royal welfare state and the royal properties are like their own personal projects/council estates.

    Is it any wonder the so many of them turn to scamming to make money? They must be sick of having their hands out to Charles and the Queen all the time. And I’m sure Charles is especially petty about it and Lords it over them constantly. Probably in exchange for favors or controlling them however he wants.

    That’s why Harry said he saw the family business model and wanted no part of it. As for the York sisters. I don’t think they are in as deep as mummy and daddy, but they’ve been benefiting from their parents scams their whole life and turned a blind eye. I get the impression that Eugenie wants to pull herself out of it and go it on her own know. That’s why she’s calling in her lawyers. Let’s hope it’s Schillings and not the ones the family uses.

    • equality says:

      I wonder how many of them will write books once the Queen is gone. PC must not think he makes enough through his business since he was selling access and honors.

      • Jan90067 says:

        As we see with all the 1%, nothing is *ever* enough.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        Yes, @ Jan90067!! They are just as money hungry here and across the globe! They couldn’t personally spend all that money but they are willing to cheat, lie and steal to take all of the money they can!!

      • BeanieBean says:

        Sarah, for sure. She’s already gone down the book publishing road & can easily get on that again.

    • Nic919 says:

      You can bet there is a lot there for legitimate reporters to investigate and that would include the Cambridges and the Middletons since neither has direct access to money right now either. We used to hear about William dealing with with Duke of Westminster for access to his private jet and he’s been seen with Lebdeved, the now lord who is the son of a KGB agent.

      The yorks are just one part of that entire scheming family.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Right. I was reading about this on the BBC news app last night & it said that the Turkish woman, who sued her money people, said she thought she was paying Andrew however many hundreds of thousands to get her a passport so that she could leave Turkey (something about a divorce & a powerful ex-husband). We’re finally getting a peak behind the curtain & it ain’t pretty.

    • Barb Mill says:

      I think you are pretty much right about all of this. Harry and Meghan were so smart to get out. I hope Eugenie and Jack do the same.

    • Becks1 says:

      In Norman Baker’s book, “And What do you do” he has a whole chapter on how the royals are freeloaders and grifters, including Charles. The story that stands out to me was someone was doing work at Highgrove (I feel like it was tile work but that could be wrong) and apparently when they sent a bill to Charles it did not go over well and they were never hired by a royal again.

      • Lucy says:

        To be fair, that’s basically all super wealthy folks. I knew a lot of contractors who worked on houses for some billionaires in Dallas. They all got stiffed to some extent on the projects. Some just by $30k (which should be chump change), some by 10x that. Also a large sports complex with a colorful owner refused to pay for hundreds of thousands of dollars of work because “you’re going to have pictures of this project in your brochure for years.”
        So, not surprising, but a mark of poor character.

    • Athena says:

      I don’t understand why they’re all such grifters. I don’t know how previous monarchs supported non-working Royals, but Elizabeth had 70 years to come up with a plan. She could have created and privately funded blind trusts for each of her children which would provide them with an income. Same with the grandchildren. Instead it seems they always have to come to her for money. A lot of the scandals are tied to finance, for example, if Andrew didn’t need Epstein for money there never would have been an Epstein connection. Her cousin’s involvement with the Russians. Margaret’s old property on Mystique was a gift from a friend. Margaret, the daughter of the British Monarch, sister of the British monarch could not have afforded it on her own.

      • Christine says:

        You make a solid point. I remember the rumors that the queen mother left more money to Harry than Willnot, in trust, since Harry would never have control of the purse strings. Surely she made the same allowance for her other great-grandchildren. Margaret had already died by then, and Elizabeth inherited everything her mother didn’t have in trust.

        I would assume that the queen mother would have considered the future of all of her great-grandchildren that were never going to be working royals, which Harry was planning for at the time.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Athena, the only explanation that makes sense is that the monarch enjoys having control over the entire family, and that’s the most effective way to do it. Charles and William will be no different; it gives them complete control over the lives of so many of their family members. I hope Eugenie is on the first flight out after Betty’s funeral.

      • TEALIEF says:

        @Snuffles 1000+. This is the longest running royal con/Pyramid/Ponzi scheme. It is only sustainable on the macro level because they have the British taxpayer at the foundation paying for it – the Royal con. The top of the pyramid gets to yank on those on further down who don’t want to get cut off of the dole – the Sovereign Grant. Those further on down have to keep up appearances so they sell access to those outside – the Ponzi  investors. The Ponzi investors then sell their access or appearance of access, and so it goes. They – all or most of the participants- uniformly love to have access to and use other people’s money instead of working. God forbid anyone of them have an actual job that comes with 9-5 taxable income.

  8. Amy Bee says:

    I’ll add that I think this new scrutiny from the press of Andrew is because he ruined their coverage of the memorial. The press would have known about this court case before now but never reported on it. I think they wanted the story to be about Harry’s absence and/or the mourning Queen but Andrew high profile role in the memorial changed the story and angered the press.

    • vs says:

      Exactly….why now? What happened to Charles inquiry? I am sure it will come back with “no proof of wrongdoing”…. I can’t imagine paying for a useless set of people who aren’t voted by the people! at least when a politician is corrupt but was voted into office, he/she can always be removed! in this case, there is nothing that can be done….

    • betsyh says:

      I suggest there’s another reason for this story blowing up Amy Bee. I kept wondering why William was saying he was going to reduce staff after that disastrous tour. Why would fewer staff have changed its outcome? But I think it’s because of the grifting stories that have come out about Charles cash for honors, Michael of Kent’s Russian cash for access, and now this. By having fewer staff William looks more fiscally responsible. I think the Cambridge’s are pushing Andrew’s grifting in the press to make themselves look better and to deflect attention away from the Colonial Tour.

      • Lady D says:

        Didn’t you love the headlines in that story though? “When I’m the Prince of Wales” The boychild just assumes that as soon as Charles is King, he becomes Prince of Wales. I’d like to see Charles make him wait ten years, but Chucky is scared of him, so what Willie wants Willie will get.

      • Christine says:

        Charles benefits from having a new, not Diana, Princess of Wales. I think Charles would hand off POW today, if he could.

        Especially since Cannot and Willnot will take the bloom off that particular title in zero time flat.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Christine, that is such a good point! Up until now I was with the people who believe that Charles would withhold the POW titles as long as he felt like it, as a way to bribe W&K to work more, but what you said makes SO much sense.

      • Christine says:

        Lorelei, I wish I could claim that I am just this smart, but I took my son to the Princess Diana exhibit in Santa Monica over his spring break, and the truth was absolutely clear.

        It’s two generations of royal photographers, father and two sons, apparently not rr adjacent, capturing everything, and the three of them all love Diana, and they recognized Meghan as exactly like Diana. Charles is fcuked if he can’t shake off his original Princess of Wales.

    • anotherlily says:

      The scrutiny of Prince Andrew’s finances arises from an ongoing court case involving the finances of a foreign businessman and his wife. Everything reported has been revealed in court documents.

  9. Miranda says:

    The “it was a gift!” defense comes up on damn near every episode of Judge Judy. The plaintiffs should take this case to her. Fergie would probably go for it because she’s an attention whore, and we’d all have a chance to see her getting yelled at and called out for her grifting, like someone should’ve done a long, long time ago.

    • Jay says:

      Thank you for giving me the hilarious image of the York girls entering Judge Judy’s court in their finery to plead their case and having her roll her eyes at them.

      Beatrice supposedly has a job in finance and Eugenie worked for an auction house, so neither of them should be unfamiliar with the legal implications here.

  10. LahdidahBaby says:

    Very slick. You’d almost think they were Cosa Nostra.

  11. matthew says:

    I’m scared for that family after the queen kicks off

    • vs says:

      why? she is partially to blame for whom these people are…….isn’t she the Boss?
      The system needs to change….only the heir should be supported ; the rest should get a job and work! H showed the way, the rest should follow….only Charles, W and W’s 1st kid should be expected to have a role, if the charade continues, the rest should be prepared to get a job and earn a living!

      • BothSidesNow says:

        Why should anyone be concerned as she allows her Cousin, Michael of Kent to continue contacts with Putin and the rest of the oligarchs in Russia!!

        TQ couldn’t care LESS who sullies the BRF, as long as they aren’t caught!!

        Also, Bitter Brother is perfectly capable of supporting himself and his Stick Figure wife, but they REFUSE to be self sufficient!!

    • Alexandria says:

      They should be scared because they are funded by ordinary people. I just read that the palace PR said they don’t comment on gifts received by the royals. That’s ridiculous. Most of them are categorized as high to low risk PEPs. A proper, audited firm has a gift declaration programme to avoid bribery. This family needs to decide whether it is a firm or a family. Such a sham and a scam. Only the head of state should be funded, not an entire family. The direct family should be accorded security but not the rest.

  12. Ohcomeon says:

    Why “respect”?
    This is reprehensible. There’s nothing to “respect” here.

    • Lorelei says:

      The members of the BRF all think they deserve respect for merely existing. They do not understand that respect is something that needs to be earned, no matter who you are.

  13. Jais says:

    Yikes, so will Eugenie need to provide receipts that all $25,000 was actually used on catering and nothing else? Or did they get a deal on crumpets or whatever and the rest was pocketed? Yikes.

    • RoyalBlue says:

      it reads like they transferred the funds to her personal account and she then transferred it straight to the caterers. so Eugenie fell into the trap and now they have got her. a momentary lapse of judgement is all it takes. why couldn’t they have transferred the funds directly? it sounds like laundering.

      • The Hench says:

        Yes “but, in the event, provided my account details” is doing a lot of work here. If the money was ill gotten then putting it through her own account (or several accounts – who was the’longstanding friend of the family?) before sending it on to the caterers is textbook money laundering.

      • Anastasia says:

        This sounds like so many weird schemes that as, you know, common folk, we know to ignore, but for people who are sheltered and privileged, they don’t.

        Eugenie was also the one who was doing a lot of work for the anti-slavery lobby, and even had her own podcast set up, and then had to pull it because Andrew.

        Which, now that I say that, I wonder if she was talking about that with H&M when she was in Cali?

      • RoyalBlue says:

        Hench, it must be someone she trusts. And unfortunately they used her. It is not an unthinkable mistake, this type of thing happens so often.

      • The Hench says:

        @RoyalBlue – oh I agree. I’m not saying she knew it was money laundering but, as you said so eloquently, she fell into the trap due to a momentary lapse of judgement – or, possibly – the fact that family friends chuck money their way quite often – often enough that it wasn’t investigated further.

  14. Jessamine says:

    I mean … I think to certain extent people randomly contributing thousands/sponsoring heckin’ fancy parties *IS* how it works for royals and royal-adjacents. At least Eugenie’s part in this seems pretty finite and transparent. The worse look, to me, is Beatrice who now has it splashed everywhere that her dad even had to grift to cover her sad, scaled-back pandemic wedding.

    • Jan90067 says:

      HOW *that* wedding, in a chapel on TQ’s property, in TQ’s altered dress, with a scaled down number of people due to Covid, would cost over £750K … well, it just escapes me. I guess the toasts were made with bottles of bubbly that cost £10K each? Catering costs of £200K per couple for the meal after? Didn’t we hear it was pretty much intimate family only, and even then Anne’s husband bowed out?

      • BeanieBean says:

        BBC is reporting the 750k as a wedding ‘gift’. So now she can pick out her own AGA cooker, toaster, etc. (BBC is actually reporting Andrew ‘paid it back’.)

    • Chaine says:

      That is the part I REALLY don’t find plausible… how did her thirty person pandemic wedding in a tent with granny’s hand me down dress cost $750,000? Was the tent sewn with pure gold thread? Did they hire Marian Carey to sing? Did they eat Sumatran tiger steaks?

      • Cate says:

        I have been trying to wrap my head around that too. One thing I do recall reading about the wedding was that they had “glamping pods” for all the guests to stay in. I imagine having 15 or so (assuming some guests were pairs and not all stayed in the pods) of those brought to your wedding location and then set up for several days is not going to be cheap. Also, I know I have been invited to a couple of traditional Indian weddings and have been kind of amazed at how much stuff the family pays for as standard (like, the family will pay for all guests to stay in a hotel for the duration of the wedding (which can be up to a week) and have all meals catered during that time, someone might come in to do hair/makeup for many of the female guests, etc. So I guess if they were doing something like that (putting on a weeklong party and covering all accommodations and food, maybe entertainment like musicians or DJs on multiple days) I can see how they get into the six figures…though $750k is still pretty staggering.

      • Jan90067 says:

        Cate, my parents put up out of town guests for my brother and sister’s weddings. They also paid for my brother”s wedding the open bar bill, the flowers, the special Viennese dessert table (my mom wanted it), and contributed to the honeymoon. For my sister’s wedding they paid for the catering (Hors D’oeuvres and a sit down dinner w/champagne , the venue (a gorgeous house on the cliffs in Malibu (NOT cheap!), the buses to transport the guests from the parking area up to the house, the rabbi, the live band, the open bar throughout the evening, a coffee cart, the flowers and her dress. And it was NOWHERE NEAR £750K, not even a tenth of that!

      • Athena says:

        The money was given and returned before the scale down wedding. The money was for the wedding which was planned for pre pandemic.

      • Lorelei says:

        It’s easier than it seems (to most of us peasants!) to spend that much…I was a bridesmaid in a wedding that cost well over $250,000, and that was in 2008, so god knows what the same exact wedding would cost today. It was at the St. Regis in NYC the Saturday night of Memorial Day weekend, so one of the most expensive nights of the year. I would bet anything that the catering alone accounted for at least $25,000, if not more.

        And this family has absolutely nowhere near the kind of wealth that so many of the royal-adjacent people do; they’re randos who live in the Gold Coast area of Long Island and the bulk of their money was inherited. My mind was blown at the time, and still is whenever I think about it, but I guess that’s why it doesn’t even sound totally shocking to me that Beatrice’s wedding would cost a lot, even if it was “slimmed down.”

    • Eurydice says:

      Articles in both the Guardian and BBC say that the money was for expediting a passport. Selman Turk told the woman he defrauded that she needed to give Andrew a gift for helping with her passport. And Turk had just received a “Pitch at the Palace” award. Andrew has given back the 750,000, but I can’t imagine he hadn’t spent it all – somebody else must have paid back the 750,000.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        I think it’s safe to assume Mummy paid that money back as Pedrew is broke, broke, broke……

      • Eurydice says:

        @BothSidesNow – lol, yeah, that was kind of rhetorical, wasn’t it? And now I’m envisioning that creepy mother and son from Midsomer Murders.

      • BeanieBean says:

        Oh, Eurydice, I know exactly who you mean! They were creepy!

    • BeanieBean says:

      I’ve never understood how her degree in history got Beatrice a job in finance. Huh. Must be more of the work of these ‘old family friends’.

      • The Recluse says:

        For some people it is always who you know, not what you know. It’s more common than we realize: the art world, the publishing world….

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        It is rather peculiar. I did a little searching and the best I could come up with was almost nothing-this was pertaining to the job she had before Afiniti. When media sought for details they were given very obscure responses to questions. Beatrice’s linkedin lists her current title as V.P. of Partnerships & Strategy. That kind of sounds the same as what Andrew used to do. hmmm In 2013 I found where she did what seems like an internship for the Financial Times. Not sure how the history degree qualifies one to be a Private Equity Analyst.

        Who you know is often more important that what you know. At least Eugenie’s work involves one of her degrees.

        I hope Eugenie hasn’t been involved in RF shenanigans. She seems like a decent sort. Having known people that have had parents that have asked their children to do things to help them out…I easily see Andrew & Fergie doing this. It takes some kids a long time, even adult ones, to tell their parents NO.

  15. Jay says:

    The fact that Eugenie didn’t bat an eyelash after a call that “gifted” her 25 000 for her mother’s party shows us a glimpse of what living in the royal bubble must be like: Totally out of touch with reality, desperate to be surrounded by the trappings of privilege, and perhaps delusional enough to believe that those trappings are your birthright, something you deserve because of your bloodline. It’s gross, and also revealing.

    Whether or not she knew the origin of the money doesn’t really come into it for me (and it’s totally possible that one or both of her grifter parents used her as a backchannel). But it was clearly NBD for even a somewhat peripheral royal like Eugenie to be offered such gifts, and to think nothing of accepting them. It makes you wonder what the others are up to, doesn’t it?

    At the very least, accepting large sums or favours opens you (and your family) up to potential vulnerability and future extortion, whether you are a member of the royal family or a politician.

    • vs says:

      bravo bravo bravo……….looking back, I wonder how H turned out to be the way he is….did he avoid all of this because he knew he will be the scapegoat when egg needed one person to be thrown under the bus?

      • Snuffles says:

        I like to think that Diana spoke to him through on of her psychic friends and they were like “Harry, you in danger boy! You better set yourself up outside of The Firm as soon as you can!”

      • BothSidesNow says:

        Only because Harry has the forethought of knowing which actors are NOT to be trusted, an example of he character that the rest of his family does not share…..cough, cough…. Charles…….cough, cough……Bitter Brother……!!

      • TigerMcQueen says:

        For Harry, I think it was awareness that he would be the scapegoat combined with his exposure to the real world while in the military that made him turn out the way he has (and meeting and marrying Meghan only reinforced the path he was on).

      • SlipKeenNot says:

        IMO Harry probably had a frugal (by the Firm standards) lifestyle and probably lived within his means, I mean, he until the aftermath of Sussexit, not burning the Diana inheritance is a big deal.
        We always get a glimpse of how the rest of the family spends, Prince Tampon according to his former butler was very jealous of his billionaire friends who could afford a huge staff, Prince Incandescent maintained a connection with the current Duke of Westminster and others billionaires to fund his ahem “projects” whatever they are, and the rest has to beg grift and still be broke.

    • betsyh says:

      Jay, I think another reason Eugenie didn’t think it was wrong was because this grifting is learned behavior. Accepting large gifts of cash is just part of the royal family business model that has been going on for generations and generations.

    • Lucky Charm says:

      If one of my parents’ “close family friend” called me up and offered to pay for the catering for my mom’s 80th birthday, I wouldn’t think it so odd. I would probably tell them “Thanks for the offer, but no thank you”, but I wouldn’t consider it nefarious or anything. If I did accept, I wouldn’t give them my back account info, though. That’s just weird. It’d be Venmo or a check lol.

      • Aviva says:

        True that normals like us would probably do check or Venmo or whatever, but this was probably a few years ago before the proliferation of Venmo, and with an amount like $25k, it makes more sense to wire transfer the funds. It’s quicker than a check and the cash is immediately available. I doubt Eugenie knows her account info. It was probably handled by an assistant just as a matter of whatever. I can see her saying “The catering company is X, you can just pay them directly. Oh, you’re worried about that for ABC-stupid-reason-that-I-don’t-realize-is-stupid-because-I-don’t-handle-my-own-finances? All right. Contact my assistant Antigone of Heavenshire by Dratford and she’ll set everything up. Thank you for helping my mum have a wonderful birthday. Ta!”

      • Jay says:

        @lucky charm, if you and/or your parents happened to be high profile public figures, you might think twice about accepting the money to your personal account. Imagine if the adult son or daughter of an American governor did this? It doesn’t have to be money laundering to be a bad look.

        I also am curious as to how broad the definition of “old family friend” is – does it just mean a connection of her parents? Or somebody with a title, because a lot of those old families have been close to the royal family for literally centuries, that’s an “old friend”. Or is it just purposely vague to explain why she accepted the money?

      • Christine says:

        “Contact my assistant Antigone of Heavenshire by Dratford and she’ll set everything up.”

        LMAO, Avivia!

    • Debbie says:

      What stuns me is that you hear a lot about the royals getting training on how to sit, stand, who to walk behind, and how to address each other, avoid kidnappings, but you never hear of them getting training on how to stay away from such conflicts.

  16. anotherlily says:

    Beatrice and Eugenie have trust fund money from the Queen Mother as do all her great-grandchildren. In addition the Queen made provision for them at the time of Andrew and Fergie’s divorce.
    From their early teens they had substantial allowances from these trusts.

    Andrew will have also had some private funds in addition to his service pay (he spent 20 years on the navy) and an allowance from the Queen’s Sovereign Grant. Together with his subsidised housing this would be enough for most people.

    Money laundering seems an obvious explanation for these transfers between bank accounts. Also tax evasion is behind many such exchanges. Both are fraudulent.

    • Snuffles says:

      I read that the Queen Mum’s money isn’t accessible until they turn 40 and as far as the divorce money, I read that Fergie helped herself to that ages ago. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s gone already.

      And we all know Andrew is shit with money. He’s probably broke too.

      • Laura says:

        Also prince Philip left money for the grandchildren supposedly. These trusts they have would be life changing for us, but for their lifestyle prob barely adequate.

      • anotherlily says:

        I doubt if this is true.
        In the case of minors UK law protects their funds and no trustee including parents could access the funds for their own use. It would be a criminal offence and parents have been prosecuted if they steal a child’s funds.

        With substantial sums there is often an appointed advisor and trustees can agree to regulate how the money is paid. It would be normal to provide a teenager with a personal allowance for clothes etc.

        Prince Harry received a much higher amount than William because he would not have the funding that William will eventually have from the Duchy of Cornwall. His trustees included a former prime minister who acted as financial advisor. He got full personal control at 30. Harry and William also have funds from Diana’s estate.

    • vs says:

      Please that Service pay is de-minimis for someone living the lifestyle he has been accustomed to…..

    • Amy Bee says:

      @Anotherlily: I don’t know about Beatrice and Eugenie but Harry has said that the Queen Mother did not leave money for him in her will.

      • anotherlily says:

        Where did you get that information?

      • anotherlily says:

        The Queen Mother made provision for all her grandchildren and great grandchildren long before she died. It doesn’t matter that she had debts when she died. The trust funds could not have been used to offset any debts. She had vast wealth tied up in property, jewellery and art.

      • Charm says:

        Ive also hesrd tht the QM was such a wastrel, it was her daughter, queen betty who pd her debts & kept her in the lifestyle she was accustomed to when her husband was king.

        So the QM did NOT hv any money to leave to anyone & certainly, H did NOT receive any money from the QM.

        H has only spkn of money left to him by his mother & said THAT was wht he used to pay down on their Montecito house & for security for his family before they started earning in America.

        And the fact they hv a mortgage means they couldnt afford to purchase their home outright. So tht means the money he got from Diana didnt make them wealthy……just self-sufficient.

      • Amy Bee says:

        @Anotherlily: All of the Queen Mother’s posessions were given to the Queen who then gave some to Charles and the Earl of Snowden. She lived above her means and the Queen had to constantly bail her out. As for Harry not receiving money from the Queen mother it was reported by Forbes magazine after Harry left the family. His team was asked if it was true that he got money from the Queen Mother and he said that he didn’t. I’m sure he will confirm this again in his book.

      • anotherlily says:

        Another report states that the Queen
        Mother left £14 million in her will to be shared among her great grandchildren with the condition that Harry should receive more than William. I’m not sure how this would work but trustees would have been appointed to manage the funds and pay each of the 8 great grandchildren their share.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Anotherlily – Harry’s spokesperson confirmed after the Oprah interview last year that he had not received money from the QM.

        I was looking it up at the time, and there is lots of “it is reported that the QM did this” but nothing confirmed. One BBC article I read said that she supposedly set the funds up far enough in advance that there were no taxes or penalties on them at the time of her death (I am not at all familiar with British tax/estate law, just repeating the article.)

        So it seems like this narrative that the QM left all her great-grandchildren $$$ may be true, may not be true. I mean I remember hearing that she left Harry a lot more than William since he would be king. But Harry has now said that he did not receive any money from her. So who knows.

      • Aviva says:

        @charm, Prince Harry may have had enough money to buy the Montecito home outright, but it is almost always better for tax purposes to have a mortgage. I only mention it to say that he may still have some of his inheritance left. We’ve no way to know.

      • Christine says:

        A perfect example of why I should read all of the comments before commenting. I somehow missed that Harry’s spokesperson said he didn’t receive any money from the queen mother!

    • Jan90067 says:

      We’ve also heard that Freeloader “borrowed” money from her daughters (trust). I seriously doubt that she ever replaced it. Knowing FF, she has always thought she’d be supported through Pedo, and then through her daughters’ finances.

      • BothSidesNow says:

        I agree that she probably helped herself freely to their inheritance!! I would imagine she hasn’t paid one pound back as well!! I wonder how they are able to look their parents in the eyes!! If I was F, or Pedrew, I would be ashamed and beg for forgiveness, but I would never betray my children as they have done!!

      • Jaded says:

        There are 2 kinds of trusts – the first is an irrevocable trust. It has terms that are created at the outset, and then become permanent. You can’t change them or use the monies for yourself. This ensure the assets are completely protected and can’t be used by anyone else *coughFergiecough*. The second type of trust is referred to as a revocable or living trust. You can retain control over it, but it will remain subject to seizure by creditors and other parties *coughFergiecough*. Let’s hope Bea and Eugenie’s trusts are irrevocable or I have no doubt that Fergie would burn through them in a heartbeat. She has compulsive spending disorder — I’ve known people with it (Mr. Jaded’s ex spent the nearly $400K she got in the divorce and is now bankrupt) who cannot control their spending addiction and will literally spend until they’re totally broke and in debt.

    • Jenn says:

      I think this myth about the Queen mother and trust funds need to die. That woman is reported to have had debts when she died. Debts that were paid by the Queen. I don’t think she had any money to leave to anyone. Also, if she had left any money to anyone it would probably had been William, since she is reported to have favoured him over everyone else.

      • Snuffles says:

        I wonder wonder what the Queen is leaving her family? They all must be foaming at the mouth waiting to access it after she dies.

        I read that if money is put in trust funds at least 10 years before death, the money isn’t taxable.

        I think Harry never touched his Diana inheritance until he had to use it to escape. Which I think was his plan all along, even before he met Meghan. I’m willing to bet the Middletons grifted William’s half from him ages ago.

      • anotherlily says:

        It’s not a myth. See Mirror online article by Zoe Forsey 30th March 2001.
        Provision for all her great grandchildren was made before her death. She left more to Harry than to William.

        Diana’s legacy of £8million was shared equally between them and by the time they each took full control investment had increased the legacy to £20million.

      • Invsblesource says:

        So the mirror is more truthful than Harry himself? Lol
        Harry said the money from Diana is what got them through.
        Considering BM have been trash I wouldn’t be surprised if what they printed was wrong but it’s troubling that people are more willing to believe these magazines about the royals more than the royal themselves.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        @Jenn, agree. It is a myth. The only thing we know for certain about the Queen Mother’s will is that QE2 did not have to pay inheritance tax. The Queen Mother’s will has never been publicly disclosed – like Philip’s and a long list of royals. Anything else out there is speculation, rumor, conjecture, whatevs..

        Both the Guardian and Evening Standard have articles from the early 2000’s about this.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        To add – the link I shared is from 2021.

      • Amy Bee says:

        @Anotherlily: According to the British press, Harry and Meghan didn’t want Archie to have a title. Turns out that was a lie pushed by the Palace. Or what about Meghan refusing to do the Lindo Wing photoshoot when the reality was the Palace never asked her if she wanted to do it. The fact is the Palace has been instrumental in pushing certain myths about the Royal Family in the press. At the time of the Queen Mother’s death she was in debt which was paid off by the Queen. Furthermore it is known that she treated William better than Harry when she was alive so the notion that she would leave more money for him instead of William is not believable. What I can believe is that Diana left more money for Harry than William. Harry even implied that in the Oprah interview.

  17. Dee says:

    I think Eugenie wrangled a rep on here as “down to earth” by being close to H+M, but not being racist and stuck-up doesn’t mean you’re suddenly above taking questionable handouts from friends of your parents. Honestly, both these young ladies could use a lesson about the importance of hard graft they definitely never got from their unserious parents. The entire family could.

    That said, I feel bad for both of them. They legit have done nothing wrong but trust that their parents wouldn’t expose them to criminals, but now they look just as complicit in what is obviously a financial scandal much more complex and damning that what we’ve been told so far. This is just the beginning, there are definitely others. If either of them reads this blog: take your husbands and run, before you’re thrown in the chipper to protect William’s latest affair or atone for your parents’ high-class busking.

    • Julia K says:

      Dee, I think more people read this blog than we know. Months ago, a comment in a U.K. Paper was word for word taken from a comment made here. By the time I came back here to make sure I remembered correctly, I couldn’t find the U.K. article again

      • SomeChick says:

        this is one of the few truly independent sites that covers the brf in depth and doesn’t just parrot what the pr puts out. I am sure that they peek from time to time just to see what people actually think!

        as I like to say, the brf is my reality show. what will they think of next?!

        I am looking forward to the Michael of Kent storyline. whoever commented that his favorite cocktail is a white russian was spot on!

      • Jais says:

        I think that was Becks 1’s husband but he was guessing for Kate! Then he had to walk away when he heard her actual favorite drink was a crack baby.

      • Becks1 says:

        Ha, that was my husband!! he figured it was some sort of racist drink, didn’t realize how racist.

  18. Eurydice says:

    OK, so Eugenie doesn’t know Selman Turk or the woman he defrauded, so who was the “long-standing family friend” who called her to give the gift in his/her name? Sounds like there are more people in this mix.

    • Julia K says:

      To give this person access to her bank account details indicated it was someone she knew and trusted.

      • Eurydice says:

        Yes, but that trusted person was coming to her with money allegedly stolen by Selman Turk. So, did this friend know Selman Turk, get the money from him and then pretend to make a personal gift? It seems like the friend has to answer a few questions, too.

    • EllenOlenska says:

      My tinfoil hat theory is they sent money via Eugenie because all of Andrews accounts were subject to the lawsuit he was facing.

  19. Mrs. Smith says:

    This whole thing sounds a lot like the Tinder Swindler scam (without the dating). Essentially they have to grift almost constantly to afford their lifestyles.

  20. equality says:

    Eugenie is authorizing her attorneys to “assist in inquiries” so she is hopefully refusing to be thrown under the bus for Andrew and Fergie’s doings. She might really be living in the US with H&M before long.

    • Kmg says:

      This feels like another distraction from the disaster tour and inquiries into burger King Willie’s own cash for access activities. Im guessing the rota are mad that Kate’s outfits didn’t sell clicks so they are turning on the Yorks. Pedo andy and Fergie deserve it, but bea and Eugenie need to run as far away from that island as possible.

      • BeanieBean says:

        Used by their parents for money laundering schemes. That’s a cold splash of water in the face. They’re both plenty old enough to make a complete break from their no-good parents before they’re all brought down.

  21. TheOriginalMia says:

    I don’t find Eugenie receiving money from a family friend for Sarah’s birthday odd. When I was planning my Granny’s 100th bday, I had people offering contributions. Now, mine were in the range of $50-$100. Can’t imagine one for $25K. What kind of party did they throw?! The only saving grace for Eugenie is that she immediately transferred the money to the party planners. Shame on Sarah & Andrew! These people have had immense wealth and are still shady and grifting af. Now they’ve drug their children into their messes.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Another big difference: nobody asked you for your bank account routing number.

    • Alexandria says:

      If there’s an alert limit for her account since she is a relative of a PEP, it would be odd and the alert should have been activated. The question is which bank was handling this and what was the alert limit? A quick transfer of funds into and out of an average account is suspicious. I can only conclude it is normal to the bank and she has privileged banking in place with higher transfer limits.

      • Lucy says:

        Banks typically have a Different set of services (and rules) for high net worth individuals.

      • blacktoypoodle says:

        Yes, if you type in “name of your bank” + “private bank” you’ll find a different set of services. Bank of America Private Bank is for people with $10 million or more. “Single digit” millionaires are not qualified.

        My car died and I’m having groceries delivered by Amazon Fresh. At my second delivery, all nicely placed on my doorstep, I told my young coworkers “This must be what it’s like to be Beyoncé!”. (I’m not used to services of any kind, my first thought was to DIY groceries with a rolling cart) They rolled their eyes.

        Different rules/different worlds.

  22. Esmerelda says:

    I’m inclined to give the York sisters the benefit of doubt: they were raised by two dysfunctional messy lying scammers, in a bubble of outdated values and incredible notions (Royal Blood, etc), amid scandals, weird financial shenanigans, creepy people just around, and unflattering press attention. I’m sure their parents lied to them about money and associates for all their childhoods. Can you imagine growing up like that?
    It’s a miracle they’re as sane as they appear, imho.
    It must be hard to have such parents – I can’t even think of how I would process having a father who did what Andrew was accused of. The tension between denial, shame, and reality must be really something.

  23. Lady Digby says:
    Was the wedding gift really a payment to ensure Mr Turk’s start up company won a prize at Pitch@the Palace event or jut a coincidence?!

    • MsIam says:

      Wasn’t the story that Pitch was just a grift for Andrew? So not surprised to see that involved at all.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      Thank you for link!! It seems that she has been scammed by this scumbag and is wanting her money back which is understandable. I think it’s safe to assume that all dealings with Pedrew, and Charles, should all be looked at very heavily by an auditor. We all know how unscrupulous this family is and it’s time that they ALL face the music, especially Michael of Kent!!! He is as disgusting as they come!!

    • CourtneyB says:

      I’d emailed this to celebitchy yesterday. It was a better story imo because it linked PitchPerfect. It really showed the bribery going on. I mean passport help?

  24. Over it says:

    All I have to say is that Meghan mom Doria might be black and have dreadlocks but at least she is 💯 class and she doesn’t scheme and scam the way the white Windsors do, so the next time the British media or the royalist want to come for her or her black daughter, they should stop and take a good look at where the true definition of class is. And it’s definitely not residing in England

    • Charm says:

      This is not the compliment you think it is.
      “Black but….” is just as racist as any other, more easily recognizable, blatantly racist comment.

    • Dee says:

      The wording isn’t the best, but I get what you mean. They only cared about what was skin deep and missed what was really important

      • SomeChick says:

        the wording is TERRIBLE. it sets up being Black and having locs as negative, just not as bad as grifting and scheming. it’s painfully bad. “at least?” just no. not saying racist things is not that hard, if you don’t think that way!

    • Kkat says:

      Re: Over it
      ” She might be black and have dreadlocks but…”
      My god that is such a racist statement

      You’re implying that having dreadlocks and being black is not normally classy

      The trash really likes to take itself out

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        I don’t believe that’s what Over it was implying at all. I read it as a slam/FU to the BM/royalists who’ve written numerous articles about Doria and mentioned her dreadlocks leaning into that being a negative thing. All the while Doria has been a class act and the BM/royalists have foot in the mouth disease propping up the Cambridges as being classy (Kate’s “never putting a foot wrong”), even though their actions/words are not classy.

        Over it has too many (well, really there can not be too many) comments in support of Meghan, Doria & Harry along with some fantastic, straight up middle finger posts to the BM/RF for it not to be noticed where her beliefs lie. Sorry for not commenting on her post from the Cambridges cancelling an event in Belize March 20th thread. #6 Yes, that would have been fun. After the fact, Will the Racist and the Duchess of Karen’s did it in one big swoop with their vroom vroom down the parking lot colonizer cosplay.

    • Over it says:

      I am sorry if my words didn’t come out right, I am 💯 black, couldn’t be any blacker and prouder of it. I am also 💯 team Harry , Meghan, Doria, Archie and lili.
      What I was trying to say and I am sorry if you all didn’t understand is that . Meghan and Her mom we’re criticized for being black. Doria for having dreadlocks. I am trying to say despite what Doria hair looks like and I have no problems with dreadlocks. Half my family has them. Is that she was attacked got them by the British media. Yet she is and her daughter Meghan are the only two people who have any kinds of connection to that family because of Meghan marriage, that can say that they are not schemers, they are 💯 class and honest hard working people.
      So please take a minute and retract your claws before you wrongly accuse me of something I didn’t say or ever implied.
      I simply mean the only one with class is the ones they always attack for being black

      • Feeshalori says:

        Over It is a regular commentator here and has always been pro Sussex and Doria so if her wording didn’t get across in the right way, she didn’t mean how others interpreted it. I got what you meant, OI.

      • Christine says:

        Seriously, all of the sniffing down their noses, and outright laughing, at Harry and Meghan’s wedding, the ones without an ounce of class are the royals and the white Markles. Hmmm.

      • CourtneyB says:

        I got what you meant. I think we all remember the snotty comments in the BM about Doria’s braids.

      • RoyalBlue says:

        I do recognize you as a regular commentator, and sometimes it’s our unconscious bias that talks when we write spontaneously. Just means we need to stop and perhaps read aloud before posting to be mindful of how our words come across.

      • Lorelei says:

        @OverIt, I totally knew what you meant and it didn’t come across to me as racist because you post here all the time, so we know you’re not. I defer to others about the wording, but I understood what you were trying to say.

        The BRF members absolutely assumed they were better and “classier” than Meghan and Doria solely due to their appearances, when in truth, the BRF were always the trashiest ones in the room.

  25. Polo says:

    I’m glad Eugenie released a statement …I see she’s following Harry’s playbook. Whether it helps her or not they can’t make up lies about her.
    I feel sorry for bea and Eug because they are dragged into their parents mess…yes they are adults now but you’re supposed to be able to trust your parents. Instead it’s scandal after scandal. It just all looks shady but I believe they aren’t being investigated.

    I think the briefing came from William and Charles as revenge for Andrew going against their wishes trying to come back into working royal life.. There seems to be lots of stories about how Will and Charles are standing together against Andrew. This is all them.

    I waiting for the York family to strike back. Come one Andrew reveal all the secrets in KP and BP.

    • Lady D says:

      Charles and William certainly know where to hit low with the Yorks. Going after the York daughters is a guaranteed way to get Andrew’s attention. The question is, will Andrew learn from this and keep a low profile in the future, or will he continue as is?

      • Polo says:

        He seems too arrogant to just quietly disappear lol.
        They’re gonna have to pay him significantly or give him something to do to get him out of the way. Otherwise what’s to stop him with his mum fully backing him.

  26. Scorpion says:

    Yeah no I don’t feel sorry for Bea and Eug! Not one diddly bit!

    Knowing how both of their parents are scammers and grifters and the company they are known for keeping. I would be ver wary when family ‘friends’ and associates would make donations directly into my bank account.

    I would have said no, write a cheque made out to the business they are employing!

    • Tourmaline says:

      They are absolute scammers and learned at the feet of their parents. It’s the York family way of life! Saw recently that B & E & their husbands were VIP guests at the the F1 Grand Prix in Bahrain, more perks stemming from shady connections made by their dear old dad.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Right? How could anyone, let alone two 30-somethings, each with a college degree, not know that you don’t give out your bank account number to anyone, not your parents, not ‘old family friends’, not anyone. Geez Louise.

      • JaneBee says:

        @Beaniebean I think the sensitivity with which bank account info is treated really differs by country/continent.

        In Europe, it is super common to provide bank account details for direct transfer payment – especially in the Netherlands, Germany and Austria. Venmo doesn’t exist in Europe, and a lot of people loathe PayPal and refuse to use it. On German eBay, it’s normal to provide your bank account details to strangers for payment.

        I understand it’s not common in the States, but this is def a cultural thing that differs by country…

      • Als says:

        In the U.K., it is very common to give out your bank account details… your bank account number, sort code and name on account. That’s pretty standard and people can only deposit into your account with those two sets of numbers.

  27. Steph says:

    This is so not surprising. But the depth of Andrew’s arrogance and stupidity is mind blowing. So he knew this investigation was going and still made sure he was front and center at the memorial? He still had Sarah post that ridiculous shit on IG signed HRH? I bet he got the call soon after about this going public cuz first he removed the HRH (really, that’s what you thought was enough?!) Then deleted the whole thing.

    Does anyone know who financed the Windows after their abdication and exile?

    • Rhia says:

      Edward Windsor inherited Sandringham and Balmoral when George V died. Bertie(George VI) had to buy the properties from him after the abdication. He also ended up paying him an allowance yearly and his daughter QEII continued it. But much like Andrew they spent a LOT of money. The French government never taxed them and they lived rent free in their Paris home. They did own their country place.

      They also sponged off of anyone willing to open their wallets.

      • Christine says:

        Are Sandringham and Balmoral the only royal properties that are outright owned by members of the family, and not considered crown property?

      • CourtneyB says:

        @christine there are other homes located on the sandringham and balmoral estates like Anmer and Charles’s home of Birkhall which was the Queen mother’s. These are the only ones owned by the monarch or future monarch.

      • Christine says:

        Ah, so Gatcombe Park must be on that list as well.

  28. Mslove says:

    Save the York sisters, abolish the monarchy! Lol. Randy Andy & Fergie will never change, they will keep grifting till the end. I’m sure there are many more money making schemes Andy & Fergie are mixed up in. Shame on them for involving their children.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      Thank you!!! Eugenie is above all of her parents shenanigans!! She and Jack have plenty of money to support themselves as well as Jack is fully employed.

      As for Beatrice, I am sorry but I don’t care for her husband Edo, but I don’t think she has fall too far from the tree!!

  29. Harper says:

    Game of Thrones Windsor: Cousins Edition is on! Eugenie visits Montecito and within two months is rolled over by the Big Burger King Double Decker Bus. Andrew and Sarah are already known grifters so in actuality this story is not shocking, is it? But Burger King going for Eugenie and Bea and triggering the Mamma Bear protective instinct in Fergie? Risky. Fergie knows the dirt on the Keen’s marriage and she doesn’t need the Rota to cooperate to get the rumors flying. #princewilliamaffair is easily activated and at some point, the Rota may feel that the splash of a negative “newsworthy” Will headline is worth breaking the injunction.

    • Eurydice says:

      Wouldn’t that be a yummy prospect. But, sadly, I think Fergie is more interested in maintaining her meal ticket.

    • Kmg says:

      I think you hit the nail on the head. Fergie wasn’t at ceremony for PP, but Rose was! Fergie and Pedrew are garbage, but they have never let the other Windsors go after their kids, or sold out their kids. This feels like revenge by Chuck and rage by burger King and keen. The rota need stories to sell or else.

      • Jaded says:

        Philip loathed Fergie with his dying breath so she was most likely banned from attending the ceremony. In any event, this has William’s (and quite possibly Poor Jason’s from behind the scenes) sticky fingerprints all over it to distract from the travesty of the Caribbean Tour de Farce.

    • Athena says:

      I read an article yesterday that Zara, Beatrice and Eugenie and their respective spouses had lunch together after Phillip’s memorial and it popped into my head that they were all discussing their escape plan once granny is gone. They had already reminisced about Phillip after the funeral, this was all about Eugenie’s move to the U.S. and Zara’s move to Australia. Bea I’m not sure what her move would be.

  30. BeanieBean says:

    If I were Eugenie or Beatrice, I’d change banking establishments pronto. Wouldn’t want dear ol’ dad to have that info, considering what he’s doing with it.

  31. Liz version 700 says:

    Those ladies need to pack up and move to the California Royal Evacuation zone. Whatever shadiness their parents have involved them in, they are on notice now that they are being used to help the grift. They are also on notice that they are the new scapegoats for Nasty Uncle Charlie and Cousin Egg. Take your kids and your husbands and get away from this mess. H&M proved with hard working it can be done. I could see Eugenie actually doing this, not sure about Bea. I think she likes the glitz of the family. But that family will destroy its own to protect the heirs. Rinse repeat.

    • The Recluse says:

      Yeah, not sure about Beatrice. She’s given off a Fergie mini-me vibe for a long time. Remember how much she liked to swan about places partying and how little work she did at that time? She seems to take after her mother.

    • Lorelei says:

      “California Royal Evacuation Zone”

  32. Moderatelywealthy says:

    We are speaking about controlling parents who see their children as employees of their own companies.m

    Remember how Charles asked Harry to meet with this ” donor”, Harry did and realized the guy was bad news, then Charles continued to speak with the guy and accept his money?

    This is the kind of trap this family uses to make sure their children will stay in line. When Harry rebelled and started speaking truth to power, Charles used this only tidbit of info he had to shut Harry, only he was very fast.

    I think itis very likely Andrew or Fergeio asked for Eugenie to please, could you forward this donor yoiur bank details just in case? You know him, Eugenie, he is a nice guy, this is only a gift, he is only asking for tax ourposes etc…

    Now Charles leaks this to tell Andrew to shut up and eat his food. Eugenie might have been expecting such a move for a long time, ever since the ” scadal” about her husband on a yacht. That might be why she visited Harry to already start preparing her escape.

    As for Beatrice, that one is just slightly better than the others, but cut from the same cloth. She married Edo, who is a noble from a country that is a republic and whose ” castle” is not even his to have and who is pretty much cash poor and they both have a lifestyle to keep. Charles knows that, if he allows Andrew to continue to show how much power he has over their mother, at least one of his children will continue to trade or benefit from trading in their privelege and is making it now for Beatrice, Andrew and Fergie the party is over, they must be happy with what they got. Eugenie is just Charles way of showing Andrew that he too could be in the same position as the Prince of Walles, with a child going ” rogue”

  33. Lady Digby says:

    Peter Hunt on Twitter pointed out that as wedding gift was received while PA was working royal it should have been officially registered as per 2003 rules.
    Separately Mr Turk claims that he can account for where all his employer’s money was invested. If it ends up in the High Court is PA going to explain under oath why he was happy to accept substantial wedding gift from a complete stranger or come clean about knowing Mr Turk had arranged a large bribe which was being hidden as a wedding gift?! Did PA return the cash to avoid testifying in court? None of this looks and sounds ethical does it??

    • CourtneyB says:

      The article about the wedding gift in The Guardian (not the Fail) said it had been paid back. Which leads to more questions.

  34. HeyKay says:

    Wow. Team Andrew is nasty.
    Andrew, of course, is a vile creature.

    Will & Kate really should be well prepared for the future when their children will be “commoners”.
    Wealthy beyond average persons imagination but, no longer Royals.
    Down with The Firm. My g-d, outdated rubbish!

  35. Julia K says:

    Money laundering is a financial transaction for the specific purpose of hiding the origin of the money. If the shoe fits…

  36. Charm says:

    Sometime after both York girls were married and there was a collective sigh of relief tht they were both now safely out of the reach of their mother’s grifting tentacles, I was shocked to see an announcement from Fergie naming BOTH her sons-in-law to the “board” of a new endeavor of hers…..something to do wth water. Thts all i can rmbr off the top of my head.

    I rmbr thinking: uh-oh, she’s ensnared them. But then, i swear it was literally a few wks later tht i saw where both men had reportedly “resigned” from this “board.”

    And it occurred to me tht it seemed tht she had been trying to get them to buy-in to tht scheme of hers but they werent keen but she went ahead and named them anyway. And then they demanded tht she clear their names.

  37. Mina_Esq says:

    I don’t think it’s unusual to have someone offer to go in on the costs of a party for a friend. And $25,000 is not very much in those circles. But yeah…sucks to suck for the Yorks.

  38. tamsin says:

    Remember when Harry had to give up using his HRH because he cannot be using his royal status to make money? What is the entire family doing but exactly just that? Harry used his status to help others, not himself. And to give Charles some credit, through the Prince’s Trust has helped many people as well. I remember Nacho Figueras said in an interview, that he has never seen Harry ask for anything or do anything to benefit himself. What Harry gets is self- healing and a chance to use his life to do some good in the world, and that Harry himself has acknowledged.

  39. Jaded says:

    If this doesn’t persuade the York sisters to get the hell out of Dodge, I don’t know what will. It’s a strange dichotomy that Andrew and Fergie seemed to have had very close and loving relationships with their girls and vice versa, but at the same time were involved in massive amounts of grift even to the extent where they were willing to involve themselves with Epstein and Maxwell — human traffickers FFS! I think the scales are finally falling from Bea and Eugenie’s eyes now that they’ve been drawn into a decidedly dicey financial shell game, and hopefully they’ll see beyond their parents’ obvious love for them into the dark hole of their sleazy behaviour.

    • AmelieOriginal says:

      When they were young, it didn’t matter so much as they were kids. But now that they are both adults and married with their own children, they can no longer turn a blind eye to their parents’ shenanigans because it doesn’t just affect them. It also affects their husbands and their kids. I think this lawsuit is a huge eye opener for both of them. Eugenie and Beatrice can try to ignore their dad being a sexual predator, though I don’t know how they reconcile that given that infamous picture of Virginia with Andrew and Ghislaine Maxwell. I have no idea how they feel about it so for all I know, it has caused a wedge in their relationship with their dad. But they can’t ignore that their parents are terrible at managing money, have run up debts, have defrauded associates, and not paid back debts. If this doesn’t teach them to keep their finances separate from their parents and to distance themselves, then nothing ever will.

      • The Recluse says:

        Here’s where one hopes that their husbands have enough influence on their co-dependent dynamic to persuade them to distance themselves from their parents.

  40. JRenee says:

    I really believe that PC knows that Andrew and Fergie are shady as AH and the York Princesses are under their thumbs. I believe that when QE is no longer alive, the gloves will come off and Charles doesn’t want all of the hidden stuff reflected on him as would be if they were working royals.
    Hell, it’s seeping out now..

  41. L4Frimaire says:

    Ugh, this royal family stays forever messy. The Yorks stay with their grift. So this happened in 2019, but this is only now coming out in 2022 after Andrew and Eugenie have pissed off the powers that be? So why is this making the press now but we don’t hear anything about indictments or legal complaint? It’s like Meghan said, the press and palace collect information on the royals, and store it away to use when it is useful to bring it out. The royals are a real bummer and so tired of them and their antics.

    • anotherlily says:

      It’s making the press now because of the current court case. Documents produced in court involve payments made to the Yorks. The case isn’t about the Yorks but their inclusion in the evidence is newsworthy and raises questions about Andrew’s financial dealings.

  42. Paisley25 says:

    I want to know the name of the close family friend who was the middleman.

    If Andrew needed money for Bea’s wedding, I assume he needed it for Eugenie’s. Who was that benefactor?

  43. Ennie says:

    I bet every almost every single one of them royals, with just a few exemptions, behave this way. Maybe some more than others, like Andrew and Fergie. I suspect maybe Anne does it less, as she seems more low key, but we have NO IDEA.
    I am very, very glad that Harry left, and has Meghan by his side. Them and their children had no chance, they were at the mercy of the crumbs the heirs wanted give them, and available for the press to tear them up. I wish they had left sooner.

    • Wiglet Watcher says:

      Anne keeps a low profile. We k ow so little about her dealings. There’s no evidence to say she stays out of these shady dealings.
      She never speaks out against it. She just lays low and the BM leaves her alone.

      • Ennie says:

        She seems both cognizant of the fact that her children would have to manage through marrying rich, actual work or shenanigans like these.
        I find funny that besides being low key, and being a hard worker (in the royal way), she still is such a snob, going to the lenght of getting a law that makes newcomer brides, to actually bow to the blood princesses.
        Thinking of having to bow to Camilla or Keenie must have stung. Good for her, but true, she gets left alone.
        Queenie had her money trail in the Panama Papers, I don’t know why the media is so surprised.

  44. Jewell says:

    The whole York family reminds me of the Featheringtons. Fergie’s reddish hair color and all.

    • phlyfiremama says:

      As Mr. Layhe from Trailer Park Boys would say, “sh!+ apples don’t fall far from the sh!+ tree”. This whole family does nothing BUT grift. Of course they are in on it. 🤣

  45. Boo says:

    The entire York family are clearly corrupt, and that includes the daughters.

  46. Remy says:

    I see a lot of people are saying it’s dumb for Eugenie to willingly give away her bank account number to a long-standing family friend so that said friend can make a deposit. It’s not like you can do much just the account number and routing number (which can be looked up online) other than making a deposit to said account. You would need more information to do damage. She wasn’t giving her pin away. If you ever written a check, you gave that person your account and routing number. I would say it’s more sus that the person wouldn’t just pay the caterers themselves, but maybe it was something like if there’s any issue, here’s my account number. Of course this is me giving her the benefit of the doubt.

    • SAS says:

      Giving your back account number is the most common way we transfer money in Australia (and I think the same for my friends in the UK), I’ve given my account to friends, colleagues, random people at second hand markets. Using a third party app like PayPal is actually seen as less secure, and we don’t have things like venmo.

      It’s the accepting a huge sum to your account from someone who refuses to pay directly to the registered business you’re using that sets off all the alarms. Unless you’re a princess apparently! Silly.

  47. Gracie says:

    What if this isn’t an inside attack but the press finally realizing that 1) they will only have repeats to play of H&M and people are weary and 2) the keens make their own scandal – no inside scoop to be had there?

    Voids are always filled, and though people were pissed about W&K’s disaster tour, most expected it or weren’t surprised. Once the press saw that, perhaps they decided to shift focus?

    • Likeyoucare says:

      Nope. British medias cant write anything about royals without permission from any one of them.
      This is sanction by charles or willie.

  48. blunt talker says:

    If Charles or William don’t get control of Andy with or without the Queen’s permission-a lot more damning news will break about their finances-that’s why Andrew is sticking so close to the queen to whisper in her ear to be on his side-I think it is vile and evil to drag or manipulate one’s own children who come complicit in this mess-Andrew does not plan to go quietly into the night and live out his life in isolation-their children trust their parents when being told to do something-thinking their parents would never hurt them-Andy is a gross individual-this looks like money laundering and scamming a woman out her money to enrich their pockets- to make matters worse this man who contacted Andy is living in one of the Queen’s apartments right now-these two act like con men to the highest order. If it smells like a vermin then it is a vermin.

  49. obserwujacy says:

    I don’t think it’s unusual to have someone offer to go in on the costs of a party for a friend. And $25,000 is not very much in those circles. But yeah…sucks to suck for the Yorks.

  50. Abonnenten says:

    Eugenie better leave that mess and move to the US when Liz dies because they won’t stop throwing them under the bus, I don’t care for Beatrice because she and her husband are thirsty af

  51. Original penguin says:

    Can we stop making excuses for Eugenie, just because you feel she comes under Harry’s umbrella?

    It is perfectly possible for her to be nice to her cousin, be not racist but also be a grifter.

    She is just as shady as her sister when it comes to perks and freebies. Neither husband has the wealth to sustain them in the lifestyle they are used to. And Andy and Sarah have blown through whatever inheritance they might have had

  52. Moe says:

    One word for this family: avaricious

  53. McGee says:

    This isn’t damning to me prima facie.
    Worthy of a more detailed dive, to be sure.