Skip to content

Prince Edward's £150k subletting deal sparks royal lease controversy

A former stable block turned goldmine—how the Duke of Edinburgh's £1.36m renovation became a £150k-a-year windfall. Is this royal privilege or a financial loophole?

The image shows a map of the city of London, England, with a plan of the House of Commons and a...
The image shows a map of the city of London, England, with a plan of the House of Commons and a street proposed from Charing Cross to Portland Place, leading to the Crown Estate in Marylebone Park. The map is on a paper with some text written on it.

Royal property income sparks outrage - Prince Edward's £150k subletting deal sparks royal lease controversy

Prince Edward and Sophie, the Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh, are under scrutiny for subletting a former stable block near their Surrey home. The property, just 400 metres from Bagshot Park, was reportedly rented out for profit while the couple paid far less to the Crown Estate. Critics have called the arrangement unfair, raising questions about transparency in royal leasing deals.

The controversy centres on a building originally leased by Prince Edward in 1998. He first secured a 50-year lease for £5,000 (around €5,750) annually. After investing £1.36 million in renovations, his terms were renegotiated—extending the lease to 150 years in 2007 for a £5 million upfront payment. Since then, he has owed only a nominal fee each year.

The property, once used as stables, was later converted into office space. It was advertised for rent at roughly €12,000 per month before the listing disappeared in December. Reports suggest the couple earned up to €150,000 annually from subletting, while their own payments to the Crown Estate remained minimal. Former minister Norman Baker condemned the deal as 'an outrage' and 'scandalous'. Royal commentator Margaret Holder urged closer examination of all royal leasing agreements. The building has housed pharmaceutical firms in the past, with profits allegedly going to the Duke and Duchess rather than public funds. However, no public records confirm other tenants or long-term rental averages.

The arrangement has sparked debate over royal finances and the use of Crown Estate properties. While the Duke and Duchess have followed legal terms, the disparity between their payments and subletting profits has drawn criticism. The case may prompt calls for greater oversight of similar deals in the future.

Read also:

Latest