Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Diana 'Took Charles to Cleaners' in Divorce, Says His Banker
The Telegraph ^ | July 25, 2004 | Chris Logan and Andrew Alderson

Posted on 07/24/2004 6:24:05 PM PDT by quidnunc

The Prince of Wales was "taken to the cleaners" and handed over his entire personal fortune to Diana, Princess of Wales, as part of their divorce settlement, his former personal financial adviser has revealed.

Geoffrey Bignell, who handled Prince Charles's financial affairs for more than a decade until 1996, disclosed that the heir to the throne was forced to sell his entire investment portfolio to meet the demands of the Princess.

"Princess Diana took every penny he had," Mr Bignell told the Telegraph last week. "I was told to liquidate everything, all his investments, so that he could give her the cash. He was very unhappy about that. That's when I stopped being his personal financial adviser because he had no personal wealth left. She took him to the cleaners."

As part of the divorce in July 1996, Diana reportedly received a lump sum of £17.5 million and an allowance for her private office. The Queen also allowed her and the Waleses' two sons, Princes William and Harry, to continue to live in Kensington Palace.

The Waleses' divorce was negotiated through their respective solicitors. Anthony Julius represented the Princess and Fiona Shackleton represented Prince Charles. The Princess, who was killed in a car crash in Paris in 1997, was encouraged by Mr Julius to give up her title "Her Royal Highness" — a move she later regretted — in return for a better financial deal.

-snip-

(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Extended News; Miscellaneous; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: royals
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-70 next last

1 posted on 07/24/2004 6:24:06 PM PDT by quidnunc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

I might have been able to muster some sympathy, but wasn't it Charles that was caught with his trousers down?


2 posted on 07/24/2004 6:26:28 PM PDT by ECM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

Sheesh. Should've just had her beheaded.


3 posted on 07/24/2004 6:27:22 PM PDT by sphinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

I believe they are all on welfare.


4 posted on 07/24/2004 6:27:46 PM PDT by HuntsvilleTxVeteran (Liberals are like catfish ( all mouth and no brains )(bottom feeders))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ECM
Yeah and the saintly Diana was boffing her chaffer or gardener too.
5 posted on 07/24/2004 6:28:30 PM PDT by AmericaUnited (It's time someone says the emperor has no clothes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited

Then I guess the tie-breaker comes down to whom was caught first and/or who intiated the divorce.


6 posted on 07/24/2004 6:29:28 PM PDT by ECM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

Well the guy gets 12 million pounds a year, so he won't be walking the streets with a sign "will work for food," any time soon.


7 posted on 07/24/2004 6:29:46 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

Once a twit, always a twit.


8 posted on 07/24/2004 6:30:57 PM PDT by Casloy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

She would be wearing a Burka right now if she were alive.


9 posted on 07/24/2004 6:33:20 PM PDT by BurbankKarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ECM
They were both guilty of infidelity. In a sense Charles has been faithful to one woman, Camilla Parker-Bowles, for something on the order of thirty years. God knows why, but it's so. In a dreadful sort of way it's touching that even an arranged marriage to a beautiful young woman could not rock his devotion to Camilla.

As for Diana, she was unfaithful as well. One strongly doubts she would have done this had she not learned that her husband was still so devoted to his mistress and would never love her.

It was a tragic chicken-and-egg situation: was Charles unfaithful because he was married to a neurotic, or did Diana become increasingly depressed and desperate because her husband was in love with someone else?

I refrain from judging these sad people.

10 posted on 07/24/2004 6:34:44 PM PDT by Capriole (DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE. FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Capriole

Thanks for shedding some light. I had no idea (which is probably a good thing) about the length of time he was with the "other woman."


11 posted on 07/24/2004 6:35:48 PM PDT by ECM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: sphinx

i think england should bring back beheadings.

PS i hate the royal family and I hate having to hear about them in the news (though thankfully they havent appeared in awhile, though when DI died i was about throw my tv away). Didnt we fight a war with these people so we wouldnt have to hear about these inbred chinless buck tooth feebs anymore??


12 posted on 07/24/2004 6:36:30 PM PDT by goldwaterlives
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
There's this distant cousin of mine who inherited one of those "Prinzes" titles, and even though she works a regular 9 to 5 job I doubt she'd give it up just for the money. These noble titles are, after all, saleable!

Shows how tacky Princess Diana really was.

13 posted on 07/24/2004 6:37:18 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ECM

"...but wasn't it Charles that was caught with his trousers down?"
He was not supposed to pull them up. Ancient royal traditions and rights of the Crown. Besides, "honi soit qui mal y pense"...


14 posted on 07/24/2004 6:44:24 PM PDT by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Maybe that's why he couldn't afford the ear tuck and jaw implant.


15 posted on 07/24/2004 6:45:36 PM PDT by sharktrager (The road to hell is paved with good intentions. And the paving contractor lives in Chappaqua.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie
Well the guy gets 12 million pounds a year, so he won't be walking the streets with a sign "will work for food," any time soon.

Just think for a mere 2 weeks of his pay most of us could set up a nice little trust to retire on. Nope. I'm not shedding any tears for this dweeb.

16 posted on 07/24/2004 6:46:40 PM PDT by ElkGroveDan (Santorum 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Torie
Well the guy gets 12 million pounds a year, so he won't be walking the streets with a sign "will work for food," any time soon.

Just think for a mere 2 weeks of his pay most of us could set up a nice little trust to retire on. Nope. I'm not shedding any tears for this dweeb.

17 posted on 07/24/2004 6:46:47 PM PDT by ElkGroveDan (Santorum 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
Shows how tacky Princess Diana really was.

Agreed. She was sort of pre-Paris Hilton.

IMHO he married her b/c she was young, relatively pretty,not overly educated, gigglily, and (supposedly)virginal.

Whereas Camilla is/was older (closer to his own age), handsome-in-a-1930's-British-sort-of-way, sensible, and, I believe, a divorcee (widow? Either way, she was an unsealed package, shall we say?).

18 posted on 07/24/2004 6:55:58 PM PDT by yankeedame ("Born with the gift of laughter & a sense that the world was mad.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

Who gets all that money now? Their sons.


19 posted on 07/24/2004 6:56:03 PM PDT by TheSpottedOwl ("In the Kingdom of the Deluded, the Most Outrageous Liar is King".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl

You must not know the Fayed family very well.

They are big time jet setters, and far from hard core conservative Muslims.


20 posted on 07/24/2004 6:56:08 PM PDT by sharktrager (The road to hell is paved with good intentions. And the paving contractor lives in Chappaqua.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-70 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson