Reply to: Cruel landlord evicts young couple & their children

[vetran]

Why do you think Charles should find a role for a disgraced royal who was stripped of his position by the former queen to protect the family?
You think that being given a 10-bedroom 'cottage' worth millions to live in is being 'vindictive'? I wish Charles would be that vindictive to me.


Gosh, she's really in a petty mood today. Wrong side of bed dear?

that's hate speech "IT" mis pro nouned me!

[woohoo]

My initial post says that they spent the money on renovations, which Vet says they didn't spend, by linking to an article that says they have repayed the money they spent.
Either they spent £2.4m or they didn't. I was stating that they did spend the money, and have since paid it back. I didn't start off by claiming they paid builders with their own money.

They didnt spend the money on renovations, they decided to make a contribution. They contributed cash so any perceived obligations would be ended. I'm know it's pendantic, appologies.

[d000hg]

The duties on behalf of the Head of State are what the Head of State says they are.
It would be a damn site easier to find a "role" for Andrew than to penalise him the way that the King is currently. Do I think King Charles can be a vindictive SoB? Oh yes.

Why do you think Charles should find a role for a disgraced royal who was stripped of his position by the former queen to protect the family?
You think that being given a 10-bedroom 'cottage' worth millions to live in is being 'vindictive'? I wish Charles would be that vindictive to me.

...

Gosh, she's really in a petty mood today. Wrong side of bed dear?

[vetran]

My initial post says that they spent the money on renovations, which Vet says they didn't spend, by linking to an article that says they have repayed the money they spent.
Either they spent £2.4m or they didn't. I was stating that they did spend the money, and have since paid it back. I didn't start off by claiming they paid builders with their own money.

oh dear.

Renovations were paid for by the public on the understanding M&H would continue public duties, they chose not to, so they didn't get free renovations and had to reimburse the taxpayer.


repay
/rɪˈpeɪ,riːˈpeɪ/
Learn to pronounce
verb
past tense: repaid; past participle: repaid

1. pay back (a loan).
   "the loans were to be repaid over a 20-year period"
   Similar:
   reimburse
   refund
   pay back
   recompense
   compensate
   remunerate
   square accounts with
   settle up with
   indemnify
   pay off
   recoup
   return
   give back
   • pay back money borrowed from (someone).
     "most of his fortune had been spent repaying creditors"
   • do or give something as recompense for (a favour or kindness received).
     "the manager has given me another chance and I'm desperate to repay that faith"
     Similar:
     reciprocate
     return
     requite
     recompense
     reward
     return the favour

[Zigenare]

My initial post says that they spent the money on renovations, which Vet says they didn't spend, by linking to an article that says they have repayed the money they spent.
Either they spent £2.4m or they didn't. I was stating that they did spend the money, and have since paid it back. I didn't start off by claiming they paid builders with their own money.

[WTFH]

I don't think its the same as them paying for the renovations. They decided to make a contribution to end their "obligations".

My initial post says that they spent the money on renovations, which Vet says they didn't spend, by linking to an article that says they have repayed the money they spent.
Either they spent £2.4m or they didn't. I was stating that they did spend the money, and have since paid it back. I didn't start off by claiming they paid builders with their own money.

[Protagoras]

Once upon a time, it was quite common for workers to have tied cottages. Examples include railway workers and police.

In more modern times PM, Chancellor, university bosses, and ministers of religion come to mind as still enjoying this privilege. A common feature, however, is that such people recognise that their tenure is limited and make private provision for future accommodation.

Contingent monarch resources have ample opportunity to purchase outright accommodation, should they so wish.
In the case of one mentioned above, it may have been more prudent to buy a house than to accept funding for home improvements and agreeing to refund this on quitting.

This really is a simple matter of folks failing to plan and take responsibility for their future, while clearly being in a position to do so.

[vetran]

That's the article where it talks about them paying $3.2million.
What are you saying no to?

Here's another article from the Boris Bailout Corporation:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54062799

It must be confusing its literally at the top!

They repaid the taxpayer because they no longer wanted to do Royal Duties they had agreed to do.

Harry and Meghan Repay $3.2 Million for Home Renovations


The couple had pledged to refund taxpayers for work on Frogmore Cottage after giving up royal duties in January.

[woohoo]

That's the article where it talks about them paying $3.2million.
What are you saying no to?

Here's another article from the Boris Bailout Corporation:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54062799

I don't think its the same as them paying for the renovations. They decided to make a contribution to end their "obligations".

[WTFH]

and no..
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/08/w...e-cottage.html

That's the article where it talks about them paying $3.2million.
What are you saying no to?

Here's another article from the Boris Bailout Corporation:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54062799

[vetran]

You know H&M spent £2.4million repairing it a couple of years ago?

and no..
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/08/w...e-cottage.html

[WTFH]

You know H&M live abroad and its sat empty?

You know H&M spent £2.4million repairing it a couple of years ago?

[Zigenare]

The Head of State has decided to allocate no duties to certain individuals, who therefore are entitled to no funding from the Sovereign Grant.

The Sovereign Grant business accounts are audited by the National Audit Office and laid before Parliament. The National Audit Office may also undertake value for money reviews to scrutinise its use of public funds.



Why should anyone, simply by privilege of birth, have a role created for him or her?

Maybe such individuals could benefit from government initiatives to get older workers back into the workplace. Train as a bus driver, perhaps?

I rest my case.

[Protagoras]

The duties on behalf of the Head of State are what the Head of State says they are.

The Head of State has decided to allocate no duties to certain individuals, who therefore are entitled to no funding from the Sovereign Grant.

The Sovereign Grant business accounts are audited by the National Audit Office and laid before Parliament. The National Audit Office may also undertake value for money reviews to scrutinise its use of public funds.

It would be a damn site easier to find a "role" for Andrew than to penalise him the way that the King is currently.

Why should anyone, simply by privilege of birth, have a role created for him or her?

Maybe such individuals could benefit from government initiatives to get older workers back into the workplace. Train as a bus driver, perhaps?

[Zigenare]

The scope of the Sovereign Grant is to pay the expenses necessary to undertake the role of Head of State.

This does not include payment to retired family members who undertake no duties on behalf of the Head of State.

The duties on behalf of the Head of State are what the Head of State says they are.
It would be a damn site easier to find a "role" for Andrew than to penalise him the way that the King is currently. Do I think King Charles can be a vindictive SoB? Oh yes.