Last year, Sarah Ferguson bought her £4.25 million London home upfront??

Last year, Sarah Ferguson mysteriously “purchased” a £4 million home in the Mayfair district of London. Fergie has lived with her ex-husband Prince Andrew for years, at Royal Lodge in Windsor. King Charles has always been perturbed by Fergie’s presence in Royal Lodge, but still, that’s been the Yorks’ living arrangement for years, mostly because they’re always “broke.” Too “broke” to buy their own home, too broke to pay off all of the loans and liens on their Swiss chalet (which they mysteriously bought, even though everyone thought they were broke). Fergie’s purchase of this Mayfair home did not go unnoticed, but there has been precious little follow-up on the initial reporting. No one knows how Fergie can afford it or why she hasn’t moved into the property or what the hell any of this means. Well, here’s a minor update:

Given Sarah, Duchess of York’s well-documented financial mishaps, it was something of a surprise that she was able to splash out on a £4 million home in London. Now the mystery over how she afforded the Belgravia property has deepened after it emerged she cannot sell it without written consent signed by her daughters, Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie.

Official Land Registry documents obtained by The Mail on Sunday reveal the unusual ‘restriction’ was placed on the pretty mews terrace when Fergie, 63, bought it in June last year. The deeds also reveal she paid £4.25 million outright without need of a mortgage.

Last night, a top legal source told the MoS that the restriction placed on the property suggests that her daughters may have stumped up the funds. ‘That could be one explanation,’ they said, adding: ‘But it also could mean that whoever purchased the property wants to make sure that her daughters ultimately benefit from it. Usually a restriction like this one is needed to stop conmen taking advantage of vulnerable elderly relatives and selling their house from under them when they are in a care home, but I don’t think that applies in this case.’

A source close to the Duchess last night declined to discuss whether she had paid for the mews home herself, stating it was a ‘private matter’, however, they alluded to Fergie’s recent publishing success, adding: ‘She has bought it very much as a nest egg for the girls so it does not surprise me at all that she has put that kind of provision in.’

[From The Daily Mail]

Yeah, I have more questions than answers. She paid for the home upfront, without a mortgage? She had that kind of money? I actually doubt her daughters have that kind of money, and even if they did, would they spend it on buying Fergie a home (which she’s not even using)? And I doubt that Fergie has gotten that kind of advance from her latest publishing contract too. All in all, it’s bonkers. I would really appreciate someone, anyone doing a deep dive on the Yorks’ finances because every time we’re talking about money, Fergie and Andrew, it always sounds like they’re con artists knee-deep in like twelve different scams.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

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

70 Responses to “Last year, Sarah Ferguson bought her £4.25 million London home upfront??”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Whyforthelove says:

    You hit the nail on the head…though it probably takes more than 12 scams to support their lifestyle

  2. MaryContrary says:

    The girls bought it with money inherited/given to them by their grandparents. They want to make sure she has a roof over her head.

    • Chaine says:

      That was my thought exactly, it’s bought with their inheritance from Phillip’s secret will.

    • Haylie says:

      Are we sure about that? It doesn’t sound like anyone but the direct heirs get money. Harry only had escape money because he inherited part of Diana’s divorce settlement.

      • Elizabeth Kerri Mahon says:

        Isn’t her son-in-law Edo a prominent property developer? I wouldn’t be surprised if all four bought the house for her just in case Andrew gets booted out of Royal Lodge Windsor.

      • Becks1 says:

        the direct heirs get the inheritance because that’s how they escape inheritance tax, monarch to monarch means no inheritance tax. I’m not sure how Philip’s will would have worked, tax-wise, since he was not the monarch, although I do think the QM’s will was considered monarch to monarch so QE did not have to pay tax on what her mother left to her.

        But it doesn’t mean that’s how it has to be, so B&E could have inherited something from either Philip or the Queen. Or, the Queen could have bought the house for Fergie, it could be Edo’s money, IDK, I’d be surprised if he gave his MIL 4 million but maybe he saw it as an investment. Maybe each of the girls gave her 2 million for it.

        Either way, its clear the girls were somehow involved hence restriction about selling it.

      • BQM says:

        Harry escaped before Philip died. We don’t know what if anything he inherited.

    • Snuffles says:

      That’s my best guess. It’s insurance in case Charles the Petty kicks her out of all royal properties.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Plausible. Or QEII bought it but required the stipulation. She was welcoming to Fergie behind the scenes for years, providing her months of free living on Sandringham around Christmas until Philip moved to Wood Farm. Also years ago, she put Fergie’s ‘oh I don’t want a settlement’ money into property investments in Beatrice and Eugenie’s names.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @notasugarhere – I agree with you. Either QEII bought this property or allowed the Trust Fund of the York Princess to buy it with this codicil or remainder to the deed.

    • Lux says:

      They sold Verbier, didn’t they? And they bought it for a ridiculously low sum. $4.5m is peanuts compared to that. I think, like others say, it might be a that all three families (York’s and daughters) put money down.

  3. Well Wisher says:

    She did not use public money to buy it, until she is indicted for a crime, this remains a private matter.

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      How do we know she didn’t use public money? There is no transparency or accountability with this whole family. And none of them will ever be indicted for anything, no matter how many laws they break. No wonder she looks like the cat that ate the canary in the photo.

      • DaniM says:

        She personally has no right to public funds. So if it was purchased with such, then someone else paid and slapped Fergies’ name on it, or there was some laundering involved. My bet is on the first, or BandE’s families ponied up the money to make sure she had a place if Andrew gets booted from the Royal Lodge.

        The revealed stipulation makes more sense with the B&E option; it means Fergie can’t up and sell it for some quick cash.

    • Eating Popcorn says:

      Okay Sarah, point taken, however… I suspect it was purchased with funds Andrew received from QEII to pay off Virginia, that he just bumped up the number a several million.

      • Mary Pester says:

        THIS ☝️, OR the Queen knew what would happen when Charlie chinless got the throne and stumped up the extra with the stipulation that this is how the deeds were made out

      • Vivica says:

        Maybe it was put in Fergie’s name so when Andrew possibly gets arrested it can’t be seized and HMTQ wanted to make sure it also couldn’t be sold for profit like someone else said.

      • SIde Eye says:

        That totally sounds like something Andrew would do. You may be on to something @Eating Popcorn

    • Josephine says:

      This is a gossip site and these people have been shady for years. I don’t think there is a thing about their finances that shouldn’t be examined. Taking money from a known pedophile ffs. She’s happy to exploit her public persona for any little advantage and with that comes public scrutiny.

    • Well Wisher says:

      There is no evidence that she used public funds to purchase this place.
      There were two recent deaths in this family, where these individuals excluding Fergie could have access to inheritances.

      • Brassy Rebel says:

        This whole family is literally financed by the taxpayers. Any inheritance could be traced back to public financing if anyone had access to these secret wills. They are entitled to no privacy when they conceal virtually everything while accepting money from public funds.

    • Becks1 says:

      This is a gossip site, we talk about private matters all the time, lol.

  4. girl_ninja says:

    Lawd. That family is grimy. Maybe she got the money from shady foreign national and had the girls say they lent her the money. Whew. Sarah is shady.

  5. Brassy Rebel says:

    Has she been spotted with 🛍️ full of cash after meeting sketchy middle easterners?

  6. blue says:

    Her special talent has been conning others for money, either as gifts, payment for (nice try) access to Andy, or loans which aren’t repaid. How much did Epstein give her?
    Iirc, QE coughed up some moolah to extricate Andy & Ferg from the embarrassing Swiss chalet debt & part of the deal was some leftover money for London digs.

  7. equality says:

    Maybe it’s a book advance to write a royal tell-all. That would be amusing.

  8. Lucy says:

    No way this is from a publishing advance. It’s either the girls buying it with will money, or Andrew hiding assets.

  9. Peanut Butter says:

    If a Nobel prize for grifting were given out, she and her sleazebag pedo of an ex-husband would be front runners.

  10. GoldenMom says:

    The smirk of a world-class grifter.

  11. Chantal says:

    Maybe QEII gave the money to Sarah and Raggedy Andy to purchase the property as a backup plan bc she knew how petty and vindictive C-Rex is and how greedy FreeWilly was eyeing Royal Lodge The extra safeguard provision for the property is actually very smart considering how financially irresponsible these 2 are. Esp with Raggedy Andy trying to use his inheritance money to go after Virginia Guiffre instead of using it for retirement. Too bad TQ didn’t go ahead and bestow a duke title on Eddie Munster to kneecap C-Rex in his revenge spree. Maybe she financially provided for him too..

    • Zazzoo says:

      That sounds plausible and explains the restrictions including the York princesses.

    • Mrs CP says:

      I think you got it right! 👌

    • Teagirl says:

      Maybe the queen did it to make sure that the York girls have access to inheritance money. I recall articles some years back about Fergie using money from the two girls’ trust funds. If it’s too and she did, and didn’t pay it back, the late queen may have arrange things so the girls had some thing their mother couldn’t touch.

      Also wasn’t there some trouble over some money given to Andrew at the time of one of the girl’s weddings, a gift from someone overseas or something?

    • Murphy says:

      This is what I figured too, QE bought it last year before she went but put this stipulation down to make sure Sarah doesn’t blow it up up like last time (and last time and last time and last time, etc.)

  12. Jaded says:

    Apparently Bea and Eug got trust fund money when their parents divorced, around £1.5 million each. They also got trust fund money from great-grandma so they must be worth £2-3 million each, however I doubt they would just give money to their mother, that’s like giving an alcoholic the keys to the liquor cabinet. Sarah bought the house from a friend, the Duke of Westminster, who who is worth around £10billion. Maybe he’s also friends with Bea and Eug, they’re the same age, and together they concocted the *purchase* jointly knowing that Charles may very well kick the Yorks out of Royal Lodge?

    • Snuffles says:

      Eugenie and Beatrice could have inherited or had trust funds set up by Philip, the Queen Mother and the Queen. We would never know. I also think it’s possible Jack inherited millions from his father after he died too. Edo is probably doing well for himself too.

    • Jan says:

      The Queen’s mother died leaving debts over million(s), Harry said she didn’t leave him any money, so chances that she left the Yorks any are slim and nil.
      Sarah was dipping into the girls trust funds for years, don’t know how that trust fund was set up.
      Harry also said he was keeping Diana’s money for his children.

      • Becks1 says:

        Yes, Harry said she did not leave him any money.

        That said, just to go along with the common belief that she did leave money to her great-grands for a minute, the story was she set the trusts up far enough in advance that they weren’t taxed when she died (the article I read said it was a “gamble” bc had she died sooner, they might have been taxed, forget the length of time involved), so the money was already in the trusts when she died. So her dying in debt wouldn’t have precluded the trusts. And she might have left something in trust for B&E and Z&P and not W&H, figuring they would be taken care of via Charles, IDK.

        But we know Harry said he did not have any kind of trust from her.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I wonder if the Trusts she set up (because I read the same article) are untouchable until they’re 40 or something. Remember how Diana’s will was changed, taking away gifts to her godchildren and upping the age when William and Harry could access parts of their inheritance? Charles even tried to get her entire settlement nullified right after she died.

        Given how these people manipulated that, I wonder if they manipulated Queen Mum’s estate afterwards to remove money from Harry. It was always understood she’d left the most to Harry, lesser amounts to William and the other existing greatgrandchildren. Louise and James received nothing because they weren’t born yet when she put the money in trust.

  13. Nora says:

    My guess is that when Phillip died he didn’t give money to Andrew because he’s such a dumpster fire and put it in trust for the girls instead. Then, the trust bought this house for Fergie but no trustee in his right mind is going to use trust money on something that can turn around and be sold so this provision got included. This way, when the house is sold the proceeds can return either directly to the girls or to the trust. Since it was purchased last year there was probably a real fear that their mother wouldn’t have a roof over her head, thus the trustee being willing to work with the family. I don’t see the girls directly putting this clause in because can you IMAGINE that conversation?!

    • ElleE says:

      (My fanfic)
      “My guess is that when Phillip died he didn’t give money to Andrew because…” Andrew was not his son & Fergie drove Philip up the wall!

      (Fanfic 2)
      Edward was the fav son both QE and Philip. The “oops” baby generally gets more parental time & love.

  14. Zazzoo says:

    It’s so weird to have this entire extended family of minor (or in this case former) royals who expect the trappings of royal life with no money to pay for it. Even the ones who get degrees and have job skills aren’t able to earn multi- millions in their professions, because very few professions pay that. They are the ultimate example of downwardly mobile, unable to afford the life born into. It’s so weird.

  15. Christine says:

    My first thought was Epstein payout. She bought it months after Andrew’s settlement. Timing is a little too convenient and there is insurance in place that she can’t sell and make a profit.

  16. tamsin says:

    This is none of our business, but why haven’t we heard about a trust fund for Harry like Beatrice’s and Eugenie’s if the Queen was setting up trusts for her grandchildren. Since Charles was the heir, and would inherit everything, she may have assumed he would take care of his own children? As it was, the Queen took care of all the “spares” financially at least. Too bad then, that Harry is being left high and dry by his own father. It seems to me that Charles should have been setting up trust funds for Archie and Lili instead of decreeing that two toddlers should earn their rightfully inherited titles. Honestly, I’ve run out of words to describe Charles.

    • Snuffles says:

      Considering the law allows for the Queen to keep her will and estate private for the next 100 years, we will never know for sure unlike the family starts talking. And I doubt most would run their mouth off as they don’t want the public in their personal financial business.

      Still, I think it’s plausible that the Queen set up trust funds for her non-heir grandchildren. She spent her lifetime financially supporting everyone, including cousins with allowances and “grace and favor” homes and decades long leases. I’m sure she knew damn well Charles was itching to cut everyone off once he ascended the throne.

      • The Recluse says:

        If the monarchy gets closed up by/after Charles and England becomes a true republic, someone might be able to force these wills to be published?

      • Mary says:

        @snuffles “I’m sure (the Queen) knew damn well Charles was itching to cut everyone off once he ascended the throne.” I’m not so sure, she trusted Charles to name Edward as the Duke of Edinburgh upon Charles’ ascension to the throne.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @The Recluse – If that happens then they are all private citizens with even more civil-legal protections. If Parliament gets involve, the House of Lords will protect the former BRF for many-many selfish reasons which is/will be actually protecting their own privileges.

  17. Lee says:

    I don’t think it’s any of our business since she’s neither she nor her children are funded by the tax payer

    • Well Wisher says:


    • BeanieBean says:

      That’s what’s kind of intriguing about this. The tabloids are investigating the financial wherewithal of a purportedly private individual, except–that individual used to be married to the second son of the monarch (at the time). And this purportedly private individual is the mother of two people who are in the line of succession, albeit down the line a bit. So in that sense her finances are fair game for investigation, although I’d prefer a deep dive by a reputable outlet or investigative journalist. It all reeks of money laundering.

    • tamsin says:

      Technically Fergie is a private citizen now, since she has not remarried Andrew. However, she lives with Andrew in a Crown Property, and Andrew wants to be supported by the Crown. What Eugenie and Beatrice do is private, but as usual, it appears Fergie has dragged her daughters into her murky dealings.

    • Eurydice says:

      Most criminals are private citizens, doesn’t mean they can’t be investigated. That’s not to say Sarah’s a criminal, but she has had the benefit of taxpayer money while living with Andrew and she has a history of soliciting funds for access to Andrew and for accepting funds from a convicted sex offender. When there are inexplicable amounts of money appearing around the royals, it raises questions.

  18. Kathryn says:

    I feel like it’s pretty clear the daughters bought it for her, shelling out 2m each, but also to prevent her from selling it and taking off with the money, she needs their approval to sell which they probably won’t give her so that “has to” live in it

  19. Eggbert says:

    Why isn’t she living there? That’s the part that stumps me the most.

    • Rnot says:

      It’s not a “royal” residence and they probably didn’t plan for the older Yorks to actually live there. It’s worth millions because of the location but the house itself would be pretty middle-class if it were located anywhere else. It used to be two flats that were combined into one. I think the initial plan was to rent it out so Fergie would have an income and so that she’d have somewhere to live “just in case.” It may have been more about the possibility of Andrew predeceasing her than about expecting to be kicked out of Royal Lodge now. B&E would inherit the lease on Royal Lodge when Andrew passes. I doubt they’d want to live there themselves or fund Fergie living there alone, even if C&W would allow it. So, this way the financial asset is safeguarded and their mother has a safety net and will (hopefully) never ask to move in with them.

  20. BayTampaBay says:

    Somebody fronted the money. The London mews home will eventually go the her daughters. It is not that big of an issue to me. IMAO, Adelaide Cottage is a an issue worth discussing due to the public money involved.

    However, I am much more interested in discussing if Peggington has taken up Rose gardening again.

    • Jais says:

      Do u mean rose gardening as in gardening a new rose or as in going back to the original rose?

      • BayTampaBay says:

        According to gossip on the “dark internet” Peggington is still Rose gardening and spent Valentine’s Day, compete with a gift of pearl necklace, with his favorite Flower.

      • Kkat says:

        Where is this dark internet you speak of BTB 😀

      • Jaded says:

        These rumors are just nonsense from garbage websites that also allude to Rose and David’s *divorce* in 2019. Take all of this with a large grain of salt.

  21. HeyKay says:

    Fergie has always been shady.
    I actually feel sorry for kids and the husbands of her girls must truly love their wives.
    Andrew and Fergie are just awful. Can you imagine having them as In-Laws.

  22. Sunshine says:

    Lol The fail being shady with that “elderly relative” comment. The Queen bout it for the girls and the fail is letting them know that they know.

  23. QuiteContrary says:

    What in the name of Sgt. Pepper is going on with Fergie’s jacket in that top photo????

  24. Claire says:

    The girls bought it through their trusts which were likely inheritances from their grandparents and it likely legally belongs to them but Sarah gets to live there for the rest of her life or something.

  25. K. Norvell says:

    Everyone forgets how close Harry and Meg are to Eugenie. You forget Sarah has spent time in the U.S.; the Royals don’t know all of Fergie’s business deals and don’t know Eugene’s plans for her family. I wouldn’t be surprised if Harry’s cousins sought legal and business advice to prepare themselves…to leave KC3’s control. I say, “Brava!” to the Yorks.