In a move that has sent ripples through the royal household and beyond, King Charles has made a decision that could have implications for the security of the royal family and the standards expected within the monarchy.

The King has reportedly dismissed the private security team at Prince Andrew's Royal Lodge mansion, which has sparked widespread speculation and concern.

Prince Andrew, embroiled in controversy following his association with the late Jeffrey Epstein, has been under new pressure to vacate his opulent Royal Lodge home.

According to reports from The Sun, King Charles informed the ten-man security detail that their contracts would not be renewed in October.

King Charles dismissed the security guard at Prince Andrew's Royal Lodge, urging him to leave the property. Credit: Shutterstock

‘They are all working the final weeks of their contract till the end of October. It’s not thought anyone is being lined up to replace them,’ the source said.

‘Everyone is speculating this means the Duke will have to leave the Royal Lodge because what other reason could there be to take his security away?’

This decision comes amidst rumours that Prince Andrew has resisted calls to downsize from the 31-room mansion.

The Royal Lodge, valued at an astonishing $56 million, has been Prince Andrew's residence since 2004 when he signed a 75-year lease.

However, since the Epstein scandal surfaced in 2019, there have been calls for Andrew to face eviction.

Furthermore, it has been reported that he needs to pay more attention to the $754,000 annual maintenance payments required for the property.

King Charles, who has financially supported his brother since Prince Andrew's Met Police protection was revoked, has contributed a hefty $7.6 million a year to keep him afloat.

This latest move by the King suggests tightening the purse strings and possibly pushing for Prince Andrew to leave the Royal Lodge.

The timing of the security team's dismissal is particularly noteworthy, as it follows reports that Prince Andrew has refused to move into the smaller Frogmore Cottage, which Prince Harry previously occupied before his departure in June 2023.

This has led to speculation that removing security could be a tactic to encourage the Duke of York to reconsider his living arrangements.

As the royal family gathers at Balmoral Castle for a family occasion, with Prince Andrew in attendance, it's clear that discussions about the future are on the horizon.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are absent from the guest list, further highlighting the ongoing tensions within the royal family.

Andrew has been characterised as a ‘recluse,’ rarely leaving Royal Lodge since December.

‘Andrew has hardly left Royal Lodge since Christmas, so he’s very much looking forward to getting away with the rest of the family at Balmoral,’ a source shared.

‘The King is keen for it to be a happy family occasion, which will see family members come together for just over a week to discuss plans for the future and unwind.’

Key Takeaways

• King Charles has dismissed the security team at Prince Andrew's Royal Lodge mansion, putting pressure on Andrew to vacate the property.
• Disgraced Prince Andrew faces eviction from his A$56 million Royal Lodge home amid controversies surrounding his association with Jeffrey Epstein.
• Prince Andrew has been neglecting the required annual maintenance payments for the property, while King Charles has been financially supporting him.
• There is speculation that removing security might indicate that Prince Andrew will have to leave Royal Lodge, although he reportedly resists moving to a smaller residence.

Join the conversation below and share your views on security, responsibility, and the royal family's latest developments.

 

[Barbara V]

Who cares another uninteresting royal story

 

[I'm Mal]

No l don't want him to be guilty because he is a man. I believe he is guilty. I am not angry with Prince Andrew. Any person who does what he was accused of in my opinion is evil.
I do believe the woman who accused him. I am not going by media. I am going by what the woman said.
For some one who has no feelings whatsoever about me you certainly made it clear what you feel about me.
You are allowed to have your opinion.
I think it might be best if we agree to disagree. I am sorry if you don't like the fact l will not stand up for myself. As l have said you don't me. But because we have a different view you feel you can make assumptions about me.
Then say you have no feelings about me. I think you are looking to upset someone today.

Oh dear! You really are a piece of work. You believer his accuser, you believe he is guilty despite not having a shred of evidence except what you read in the media yet you are adamant that you are not going by media. Can you not see how you are contradicting yourself. I sincerely hope you never get called to jury service. I am amazed how you and countless others set themselves up as judge, jury and executioner when a high profile man is accused of something. This is not a matter of agree to disagree, that is a cop out when somebody is called out on something that is just wrong. All you have got, to express your vehemence towards Prince Andrew is hearsay. I am not looking to upset anybody least of all the likes of you. I care not even a modicum about you. I am pointing out that under the Westminster Justice System, the burden of proof is on the accuser and that the accused shall be deemed innocent until proven guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. Prince Andrew, whilst he did have a prima facie case to answer, has never been proven guilty despite lawyers with far more intelligence than you and I, trying to do so. Your insistence that Prince Andrew is guilty, does not have a leg to stand on and your case against him, based on media gossip is full of holes.

 

[JimmyFlatrock]

You are not a very nice human

Not so. Bella is 100% a warm and kind-hearted lady. I have recently witnessed her nice levels myself.

Mate, despite your own accusations against Bella, you are way too judgemental about someone just expressing an opinion. Can't see why the subject matter of Royal family would make you react that way. Perhaps there's more to it.

 

[Marilynne]

You are very welcome. You might work very hard to not be judgmental but not very well in this case. You can believe whatever you like but that does not make it fact. False accusations are plentiful via the media but that does not make anyone guilty. Do you know for a fact that he has done very evil things or do you just accept the media gossip? Do you want him to be guilty just because he is a man? Do you want him to be guilty because he was accused by a woman? Are you a misandrist? It is very sad that you feel so angry towards Prince Andrew who you have never met and only know what you believe from the media. I personally have no feeling whatsoever about you.

You have written this person is not a very nice person and now you are saying you have no feeling whatsoever about her - do you often forget what you have said or written?

 

[Veggiepatch]

Not so. Bella is 100% a warm and kind-hearted lady. I have recently witnessed her nice levels myself.

Mate, despite your own accusations against Bella, you are way too judgemental about someone just expressing an opinion. Can't see why the subject matter of Royal family would make you react that way. Perhaps there's more to it.

Maybe Mr MALfunction is privy to the proclivities of Punce Andrew, et al?

 

[BellaB18]

Not so. Bella is 100% a warm and kind-hearted lady. I have recently witnessed her nice levels myself.

Mate, despite your own accusations against Bella, you are way too judgemental someone just expressing an opinion. Can't see why the subject matter of Royal family would make you react that way. Perhaps there's more to it.

Thank JimmyFlatrock, for your very kind words. I shall not be engaging with this person anymore. I tried to stand up for myself but a complete waste of time. I do try to be a good none judgementle person. Your kind words have made my day
Kind regards Vicki

 

[DLHM]

Maybe Mr MALfunction is privy to the proclivities of Punce Andrew, et al?

Ah Veggie. Am sitting here at the hairdresser getting my hair done. I burst out loud reading “Punce” Andrew!

 

[I'm Mal]

Don’t bother with @I’m Mal. From posts he’s made in the past, he just proves that it’s our privilege to not know him. Best to forget all about him and his comments. In the SDC settings, you can choose to ignore his replies altogether.

For what it’s worth, your posts have shown what a kind person you are @BellaB18.

Ah the local bully. Are you and your mates going to threaten me with violence like you did last time we crossed swords?

 

[I'm Mal]

Maybe Mr MALfunction is privy to the proclivities of Punce Andrew, et al?

Had a dose of manure today have you Mr WEEDpatch?

 

[JimmyFlatrock]

Oh dear! You really are a piece of work. You believer his accuser, you believe he is guilty despite not having a shred of evidence except what you read in the media yet you are adamant that you are not going by media. Can you not see how you are contradicting yourself. I sincerely hope you never get called to jury service. I am amazed how you and countless others set themselves up as judge, jury and executioner when a high profile man is accused of something. This is not a matter of agree to disagree, that is a cop out when somebody is called out on something that is just wrong. All you have got, to express your vehemence towards Prince Andrew is hearsay. I am not looking to upset anybody least of all the likes of you. I care not even a modicum about you. I am pointing out that under the Westminster Justice System, the burden of proof is on the accuser and that the accused shall be deemed innocent until proven guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. Prince Andrew, whilst he did have a prima facie case to answer, has never been proven guilty despite lawyers with far more intelligence than you and I, trying to do so. Your insistence that Prince Andrew is guilty, does not have a leg to stand on and your case against him, based on media gossip is full of holes.

Angry man! No need to launch such a vehement attack on the lady Bella.
You do get that it's just an opinion.
No doubt spurred on by the hermits close association with a charged sex trafficker who committed suicide rather than face justice. And he paid out a shitload of dough. So a reasonable opinion to have one would think. No good mansplaining how the judicial system works. That's well known to most on here and boring at best.

Now if you want to talk about the desire to defend the bloke who doesn't feel the need as a public figure to respond to reasonable questions and bludge off someone else's generosity in a 31 room house apparently on his own, apart from a 10 man security team required to wipe the royal bottom, then I reckon you could get some genuine interest going in what you have to say.

What say you?

 

[I'm Mal]

Angry man! No need to launch such a vehement attack on the lady Bella.
You do get that it's just an opinion.
No doubt spurred on by the hermits close association with a charged sex trafficker who committed suicide rather than face justice. And he paid out a shitload of dough. So a reasonable opinion to have one would think. No good mansplaining how the judicial system works. That's well known to most on here and boring at best.

Now if you want to talk about the desire to defend the bloke who doesn't feel the need as a public figure to respond to reasonable questions and bludge off someone else's generosity in a 31 room house apparently on his own, apart from a 10 man security team required to wipe the royal bottom, then I reckon you could get some genuine interest going in what you have to say.

What say you?

Rant over? Feel better now? Take a Bex and lay down for a while, blood pressure must be through the roof. I have said it before again and I'll say it again: I will say what I like and I mean exactly what I say and care not if it pisses you or anyone else off. There was no attack on Bella, but to continue to accuse and pass judgement on somebody that has not been found guilty by the courts is not acceptable. So what if he paid out shitloads of money, that doesn't make him guilty.

 

[JimmyFlatrock]

Ah the local bully. Are you and your mates going to threaten me with violence like you did last time we crossed swords?

Ah, a glimpse into possible reasons for a seemingly out of the blue boots in on Lady Bella, who was kind to me. She is well able if she wishes to defend herself, but I'm curious now given how the emotions have heightened quickly.

Rant over?

Not a rant, doesn't even piss me off. Health is fine. Merely an invitation to engage in a discussion about the article. Seems there's much ado that is unknown here. Just a question, is it really about Andrew or a desire to attack for other reasons?

 

[I'm Mal]

Ah, a glimpse into possible reasons for a seemingly out of the blue boots in on Lady Bella, who was kind to me. She is well able if she wishes to defend herself, but I'm curious now given how the emotions have heightened quickly.



Not a rant, doesn't even piss me off. Health is fine. Merely an invitation to engage in a discussion about the article. Seems there's much ado that is unknown here. Just a question, is it really about Andrew or a desire to attack for other reasons?

Firstly, where do you get the boots in on Bella? I pointed out to her that accusation does not equal guilt and pointed out that it would be not nice if she were a victim of that. She escalated the emotions.

Secondly, you et al seem to think I am attacking. Not at all. Just pointing out how people in general seem to convince themselves that if an accusation is made, the accused must be guilty regardless of evidence or lack there of. Andrew was accused but the accusation was never proven and now people including Bella are vehemently continuing to accuse him. So what if he knew Epstein, lots of others did too. Just knowing someone does not make them guilty. My point to Bella was that if she were accused and then had society consider that to mean she was guilty despite lack of evidence, how would she feel? I ask you the same question.

 

[DLHM]

Ah the local bully. Are you and your mates going to threaten me with violence like you did last time we crossed swords?

You @I’m Mal, are the very first person who’s ever accused me of being a bully! That’s rich coming from you. But you really have nothing of interest to say anyway, so shut it.

 

[I'm Mal]

You @I’m Mal, are the very first person who’s ever accused me of being a bully! That’s rich coming from you. But you really have nothing of interest to say anyway, so shut it.

Ah ok, play innocent. Suit yourself That is normal behavior for a bully. I will continue to say whatever I like and if it pisses you off scroll on and ignore me. You have never posted anything of substance worth reading anyway

 

[DLHM]

Had a dose of manure today have you Mr WEEDpatch?

Your comments appear to be from someone who’s bored and boring. You must be well acquainted with manure as you are so full of it.

 

[I'm Mal]

Your comments appear to be from someone who’s bored and boring. You must be well acquainted with manure as you are so full of it.

keep trying. Pots and kettles.

 

[Jo Piper3]

Why do they need to live in a 31 room mansion anyway, guilty or not?

 

[Veggiepatch]

Had a dose of manure today have you Mr WEEDpatch?

Your daily dose of Durolax is overdue. Unless you require your beloved Punce Andrew to perform a manual extraction.

You are full of shit!

 

[Jo Piper3]

Please play nicely everyone.