Mystery of the Royal Lodge announcement that never was

A rumoured royal announcement sent the nation’s media into a frenzy last night with major media outlets sending teams to Windsor – only for the palace to abruptly announce there would be no statement.

Senior BBC journalists were allegedly briefed on Thursday evening that ‘something significant’ was expected to happen at the Prince’s Royal Lodge home.

Teams of TV and press journalists raced to Windsor to be on hand to record the mysterious story which was expected to break.

Among those feeding the mounting media excitement was former senior BBC journalist Emily Maitlis who posted shortly before 8pm: ‘We may be expecting news from the Windsor estate later this evening where tv crews have been told to expect “passing traffic”.’

But as the flurry of media activity exploded, the Palace is understood to have indicated in response to numerous media questions that there would not in fact be any announcement that evening.

Reporters who had been told to get there in a hurry arrived in Windsor to find nothing was happening – and within hours the entire press pack that had gathered was stood down by editors.

Maitlis, who now hosts a podcast, then updated her earlier post hyping imminent ‘news’, writing: ‘Crews have now been pulled and stood down. Very confusing.’

The false alarm has done nothing to kill off speculation about the nature of the tip-off that had been given to the BBC.

The apparently conflicting briefings at two different points in the evening have inevitably led to speculation among royal reporting circles as to what might yet happen.

The question of the disgraced Prince’s occupancy of Royal Lodge on the Windsor estate has become increasingly controversial in recent days following the announcement last Friday that the Duke of York would no longer use his royal titles.

Multiple media outlets have examined the favourable arrangements such as paying a ‘peppercorn rent’ under which Andrew and his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson have been allowed to live for over two decades.

The mounting pressure on Andrew, 65, to quit his 30-room property came after a constant stream of revelations about his friendship with paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein and other scandals.

One member of that royal press circle told the Daily Mail today: ‘There was great excitement at what might be about to happen – and then nothing did.

‘So, naturally, everyone remains very jumpy and is speculating furiously about what might be about to happen – what might be about to be announced and about whom.

‘There’s a febrile atmosphere.’

The Daily Mail has approached Royal press offices asking for clarification over events yesterday evening – and over whether any announcements are expected today.

With no announcement being made last night, other news organisations were told by a Royal source that nothing had been scheduled to happen in relation to the house where Andrew has lived rent free for more than 20 years.

The conflicting briefings has led to speculation that there may be an announcement around Andrew’s future.

It follows growing pressure from MPs and the public for Andrew to quit the house and move into a more humble private home.

King Charles is known to have been desperately trying to persuade his problematic younger brother to downsize and move out of Royal Lodge in recent years amid the slew of allegations about his private life.

Public concern about Andrew’s behaviour has increased following the posthumous publication of the book by Epstein’s former teenage ‘sex slave’ Virginia Giuffre.

Virginia who died by suicide aged 41 at her home in Australia earlier this year claimed in her memoir Nobody’s Girl that she had sex three times with Andrew, in London, New York and on Epstein’s private island from when she was just 17 years old.

Andrew has repeatedly denied her claims and stated that he had no recollection of ever meeting her, although he famously paid her a reported £12m out-of-court in 2022 to settle her sex abuse civil lawsuit, without admitting any liability.

Other allegations which have dogged Andrew include his relationships with shady characters such as suspected Chinese spies and recent revelations that he was in email contact with Epstein after saying he no longer had anything to do with him.

The King is said to believe that many of Andrew’s problems stem from chasing a lifestyle he simply cannot afford.

But Andrew has stubbornly insisted that he has a cast-iron lease on Royal Lodge and his brother has no legal right to throw him out, despite mounting public anger about him only paying a peppercorn rent for the property in return for him having paid £7.5m to refurbish the house.

The Telegraph reported this week that family friends suggest that Andrew is convinced that the King, who is battling cancer, wants to give the property to Queen Camilla in the event of her outliving him.

The reported arrangement is said to be similar to that of Queen Elizabeth II’s mother, who moved into Royal Lodge when she became a widow.

An unredacted copy of Andrew’s lease on Royal Lodge shows that while he paid £1million to lease the property in 2003 and spent £7.5million on refurbishments, he has paid only ‘one peppercorn (if demanded)’ of rent a year since taking on the mansion.

This is because Andrew is deemed to have paid the rent – which was in the region of £260,000 a year – up front through the work he has funded to bring the palatial property up to scratch.

It also means the Crown Estate will have to pay him around half a million pounds if he were to quit his mansion before the lease on it runs out in 2078.

The original lease agreement, submitted to the Land Registry by Andrew 20 years ago, redacted sentences which would have shown he was not paying rent – essentially hiding the fact from the public and skewing their perception of his living arrangements.

Sources have stressed to the Daily Mail that questions still remain over how the King’s brother can afford the vast 30-bedroom property, which comes with multi-million running costs.

This week, the Daily Mail exclusively revealed that Andrew is not believed to have received any significant inheritance from the Queen or Queen Mother, raising fresh questions about how he can afford to stay in the property – particularly when he now receives no personal allowance from the King, or public funding.