Royal Wealth and Finances 2: Sep 2022 -

[yukari]

Prince of Wales’s Duchy accused of allowing homes on royal land to grow mouldy

People living in rented properties claim there is a lack of insulation and black mould growing in some cases

www.telegraph.co.uk

(...)

Claire Williams, 53, allowed The Mirror to take pictures of her former home in the Duchy. The newspaper reported that she was evicted last week over rent arrears, which she disputes.

The former farmhouse tenant in Exeter, who lived there for more than 20 years, said that black mould started growing below ground level many years ago.

“I’ve complained about it for 21 years,” she said, adding: “The repaint was done about a week before I moved in so you couldn’t see it.”

The programme also conducted a five-month investigation alongside The Sunday Times to assess the thousands of properties and their business contracts owned by the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall – the King and William’s private estates.
Last year, the Duchy of Lancaster raised £27.4 million for the King while William’s Duchy of Cornwall raised £23.6 million.

The investigation found that the Duchies make millions each year through rents charging councils, government departments, businesses and even the Ministry of Defence.
For example, William’s Duchy was found to have signed a £37 million deal to lease Dartmoor Prison to the Ministry of Justice, charged the navy more than £1 million to build and use jetties and moor warships on its land and charged the Army to train on Dartmoor.

The Telegraph understands that the Duchy rents are set by reference to comparable market evidence and tenants are able to obtain external advice before reaching an agreement.
The Duchy also has a long-standing relationship with the Army, which includes the MoD using the Dartmoor land for training purposes under licensing agreements that date back to the 1800s.

The Telegraph understands that Ms Williams has been in arrears since 2005 and that the Duchy worked closely with her to develop a repayment plan, which she did not follow.
An independent surveyor is understood to have visited the residence in May this year, and found that it had not been heated or ventilated properly and was therefore causing mould. The former tenant is said to have not formally reported damage to the property and has not allowed access for contractors on numerous occasions.

(...)

Prince of Wales's Duchy accused of allowing homes on royal land to gr…

archived 2 Nov 2024 19:11:23 UTC

archive.ph

It looks like Channel 4 did similar investigation documentary in 2013 since there is statement from The Duchy of Cornwall in relation to the Dispatches programme broadcast on 1st July 2013 in Royal Family website. I have no idea what kind of documentary was that so I wonder if there's new discovery or update or it's merely because there's new Prince of Wales hence they do another one.

A statement from The Duchy of Cornwall in relation to the Dispatches programme broadcast on 1st July 2013

The following is a statement from The Duchy of Cornwall in response to the broadcast on 1st July of an edition of the Dispatches programme relating to some...

www.royal.uk

 

[An Ard Ri]

More on the Investigation from the Time Radio

 

[SLV]

So the annual income from the Duchy of Cornwall is 23 million pounds for William. How much does the King get from the Duchy of Lancaster?

 

[Durham]

In case anyone missed the link to Arbiter’s overview (now bolded in parts):

1 The income from both Duchies has been voluntarily taxed since 1993.

2 The day-to-day management of the Duchy of Lancaster is administered by the Duchy Council, which is responsible to the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (a government appointee)

3 HM Treasury must approve all property transactions for the Duchy of Cornwall, and its accounts are laid before Parliament to ensure it is keeping to its statutory obligations.

4 The financial and environmental performance of both Duchies is independently audited and freely available on their websites.

5 The Duchies are private portfolios dating back to the 13th century, entirely separate from the Crown Estate which surrenders its revenues to HM Treasury.

6 The Duchies are inalienable assets. The King and the Prince of Wales are not entitled to the portfolios' capital or capital profits.

7 Legislation impacting the Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster is liable to receive King's or Prince's consent before they are debated in Parliament, but consent may only be withheld with ministerial advice. It is simply untrue that The King or Prince of Wales benefit from enormous sums of 'secret' money, or that the information outlined in #Dispatches is new at all.

So not quite the damning expose it would appear – anyone else think The Times is becoming increasingly tabloid? And the journalist on Times Radio who persists on framing this as The King does this shock horror (!) & The Prince of Wales does that gasp (!) is being silly – these are commercial decisions being made by highly paid executives. And using the term “tentacles” is an interesting choice of language – it was used by critics in the early C20th about the great aristocratic private estates of London. This journalist knows what he’s doing in employing this sort of emotive & pejorative language.

That said, I think there are legitimate questions to be asked over tax. I don’t see why either estate should have special tax status if they’re run as commercial enterprises.

And it is not acceptable for landlords to leave tenants living in sub-standard accommodation. That for me is the most objectionable part of this report – if accurate of course. There is after all a reason why domestic rentiers are as unpopular as tax collectors, traffic wardens & politicians. If accurate, that really stinks & someone should be held responsible.

 

[tommy100]

I agree that the most shocking part is the state of some of the properties being rented out to everyday families and people.
They clearly are making enough (circa £20million each profit annually each) to invest something back into the state of the properties they own.

That is the part that annoys and shocks me the most. The idea that charities and public bodies have chosen to enter commercial deals with the Duchies is somehow controversial I don't quite get. To shock they'd have been better focussing on the poor state of some of the home being rented out IMO.

 

[Durham]

If the revenues of the estates went to the government instead of the rf these charities & public bodies would still be paying rent so yes I agree.

 

[Chimene]

I thought I read that the tenant was not responsive to whatever entity is in charge of inspecting the property. She also had not paid rent for a number of years. I can’t vouch for the validity of this information so please don’t quote me on it.

 

[yukari]

I thought I read that the tenant was not responsive to whatever entity is in charge of inspecting the property. She also had not paid rent for a number of years. I can’t vouch for the validity of this information so please don’t quote me on it.

Telegraph mentioned this:
"The Telegraph understands that Ms Williams has been in arrears since 2005 and that the Duchy worked closely with her to develop a repayment plan, which she did not follow.

An independent surveyor is understood to have visited the residence in May this year, and found that it had not been heated or ventilated properly and was therefore causing mould. The former tenant is said to have not formally reported damage to the property and has not allowed access for contractors on numerous occasions." (Article above on post #65)

Then again, this lady was the one who's being interviewed by the Mirror, no mention whether she's the same tenant being referred in the Times or Channel 4 investigation.