The Cambridges ‘borrowed’ a chateau so they wouldn’t mix with the peasants

wenn28670020

By my cursory research, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s last public appearance was on July 24th, when they went to Portsmouth so Kate could flirt with Ben Ainslie. Before that, Kate made a few appearances at Wimbledon, and Kate and William were somewhat busy (for them) at the beginning of July. But August has been a dead zone of zero public appearances. Kensington Palace recently announced that they would be stepping out on August 23 & 24. So, basically, they took a month “off” from doing barely anything. And of course, they had to gear up for their vacation (a week of not working), then have the vacation (two weeks), plus the come-down of not being on vacation (another two weeks of not working). All in all, their lives are so exhausting, you guys. I don’t even know how William keeps up his minimal hours at the EAAA! Thankfully, we do know where they were on vacation, after the fact, of course. They can’t have peasants wandering over to their borrowed chateau. Yes, that’s right – Will and Kate didn’t stay at a hotel in France, they borrowed a chateau.

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have holidayed in a stunning French chateau owned by the media boss who first employed David Cameron. Prince William and Kate spent part of their recent summer break in the 16th-century holiday home of Michael Green, who has a £103million fortune. The couple, along with their children Prince George, three, and one-year-old Princess Charlotte, enjoyed a ten-day break at Chateau La Rocque, in the village of Pouydraguin, west of Toulouse. It is not clear whether the couple paid to stay in the chateau or whether they were lent it.

However, they have previously borrowed properties belonging to the Queen’s nephew, Viscount Linley, in Provence, and a lavish villa in Mustique, owned by John and Belle Robinson, founders of the Jigsaw empire. They arrived in France in a private jet owned by the Duke of Westminster, who died on Tuesday, which returned to pick them up on Friday last week and then flew them home to Anmer Hall in Norfolk. Prince William has since returned to work as a pilot with East Anglian Air Ambulance.

Green, 68, employed David Cameron as his spin doctor for seven years at Carlton Communications before he was elected as MP for Witney.

[From The Daily Mail]

The DM has some photos of the chateau, and it reminds me of when Will and Kate’s home in Wales was repeatedly called a “cottage,” like they were slumming it in some tiny little sea-battered one-bedroom wreck. As it turned out, their Welsh “cottage” was a beautiful seaside home that looked like it was easily five or six bedrooms. Their borrowed “chateau” is practically a castle. And ten bucks says they didn’t pay diddly squat to “borrow” it. As I keep saying, they get freebies ALL the time. Katie Nicholl at the Mail says the same thing – the Cambridges have a history of vacationing for free because they’re so “well connected” and wealthy people just love to “host” royalty. You can read Nicholl’s fascinating piece about their freebies here. Oh, well. At least they didn’t have to mingle with the peasants. That’s always so exhausting.

One last thing… the DM also points out that the Middletons’ Party Pieces company is now selling “Princess Wigs,” I sh-t you not. They’re supposed to be fun party wigs in case you too have a daughter who wants to wait around for a decade to marry a prince. Just the idea that the Middletons are selling Princess Wigs has MADE MY DAY.

wenn28670354

wenn28670462

Photos courtesy of WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

94 Responses to “The Cambridges ‘borrowed’ a chateau so they wouldn’t mix with the peasants”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. COSquared says:

    So…what do they pay for? Even George’s robe that he wore when the Obamas visited was a freebie sent by the company’s owners.

  2. LA says:

    Well…at least these freebies don’t cost the British people anything?

    That’s the nicest thing I can say about this.

    • Beeflea93 says:

      Yeah, I’m a Brit and it makes me mad that my taxes fund these people…that said, if I’m not paying for it I really don’t care. If they can scrounge a luxury vacay for free then more power to them!

      • LeAnn Stinks says:

        I cannot blame you Beeflea,

        It would make me very angry as well. My great grandma was from London, and I never understood, how the citizens put up with funding the monarchy’s extravagant lifestyle.

      • MinnFinn says:

        Brit taxpayers did pay for their vacay with thousands of pounds in added security costs. You paid for RPOs to fly to France a week or two before Willy got there. They checked the security of the chateau etc. stayed a night or three in a hotel all paid for by taxpayers and then RPO(s) flew back to the UK.

        You also paid for two or three BRF vehicles to be driven to France which were awaiting the couple as they departed the D of W’s plane. The convoy all with UK license plates reportedly stayed in France the entire 2 weeks and then the vehicles were driven back to the UK when the holiday was over.

      • anon says:

        For all the Americans complaining about the British Royal family’s vacations, how about the hundreds of millions we spend on our Presidents and Vice Presidents. The American President gets a free house, a weekend vacation house/resort, custom made cars, not 1, but 2 airplanes, helicopters AND they get free security after they retire.

        Why blame the royal family? The poor things are born in a bubble. Let’s hold all world leaders to the same standards..

      • sdgirl says:

        I agree, we should hold them to the same standards. The president and vice president actually work full-time governing a country. You’re comparing Will and Kate to them? I haven’t heard any stories of the Prime Minister or President working 2 days a month and borrowing vacation homes. In that case, your comparison would make sense and think it would be totally appropriate to question that.

    • maria 2 says:

      yeah, better they get freebies than tax payers having to pay for all their vacations.

      • Zardi123 says:

        But Maria 2 it puts them in a position where they could be bribed or something else
        they are FREELOADING and its so disgraceful and downright greedy…

    • Megan says:

      Lots of people rent vacation houses, so I don’t side-eye that, but I do side-eye choosing your vacation based on where you can get a freebie.

    • notasugarhere says:

      The owners are not their personal friends, they’re not the “family” KP announced they were staying with. What are the owners going to expect in return for granting royals this favor?

      When CP Victoria and Daniel stayed in the US for their honeymoon, there was public questioning. They stayed at a home owned by a wealthy Swedish businessman and questions were raised.

      • Betti says:

        This is what worries me. Their and the Middlestons obsessions with freebies is not only going to bite them on the ass but the British people as well. There will b a point that those favours will be collected on. The Duke of Windsor is another famous freebie grubber and look how it ended up for him. like William he pleaded poverty all the while hiding his wealth away.

        The Buckets and her family are a threat to the crown but as we know Chuck doesn’t have the balls to stand up to his son so it will have to b the gov. I think if he becomes King it won’t be for long as a scandal will push him off the throne.

      • Sharon Lea says:

        Yes, it is odd that it was widely reported they would be visiting ‘family.’ I don’t mind if they saw relatives. But was that the cover as to why they were staying in someone’s mansion and not in a hotel?

      • Deedee says:

        Am I right that the French would’ve been tasked with security for the Lazy Ones, even though their country is already on high alert due to terrorist attacks? Let’s contemplate for a minute the folly of this little family having a holiday in a private chateu, when they have several private homes within their own family and country? Also, didn’t KP say they were at the glitzy hotel? And the royals were visiting family? Something is not right here.

      • LAK says:

        The french govt would have added extra security on top of WK’s ever present security. This was 2 future + a spare heads of state on french soil during a time of heightened terror alert.

        It was thoughtless of the Cambridges (or any other travelling VIPs) to visit France at this time because of timing. They would have been given security regardless, but due to the high terror alert, one incident only a few days before their arrival, both the British and French security provided is higher than at any other time.

      • pio says:

        +1000

    • Sarah says:

      The taxpayers paid for security, plus I’m sure they had extra security from the French police, costing the French taxpayers money. Plus, they need their police in other places, not protecting these two overprivileged useless wankers.

    • Seraphina says:

      LA, nothing is ever given out for free. NOTHING. People will call back to collect n favors. As the saying goes: one hand washes the other.

      • tschic says:

        I was wondering if something like this is allowed?
        I mean in Germany teachers are not allowed to take presents from their pupils`parents for example, even if it`s the last year and everything is finished. There are many laws against corruption.
        It`s always like: One hand washes the other.
        Not money, but little favours…. I don`t want my king having to give favours in return for other favours….
        why is it not forbidden?

  3. Sixer says:

    They’re selling princess wigs. I’m selling voodoo prince and princess dolls with specially sharpened pins.

    • Kitty says:

      What makes me angry is not this, its the fact that every time they wheel out the kids majority forget about their lack of work and laziness. Now they are bringing the kids on the Canadian tour now.

      • sunny says:

        Why is it such a big deal? As far as royalty goes they’re harmless. The insane excesses of the past and the tyranny makes them look like saints in comparison. I’m not a fan of them but to have such strong vitriolic hatred for these people you don’t even know is kinda weird. Not saying you specifically, just the commenters here.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Their PR games are obvious, but many people cannot believe Diana’s Golden Child can do any wrong.

        W&K aren’t celebrities although they act like them. They are taxpayer funded government representatives. None of their games end up being harmless, from shutting down freedom of the press in public places to the influence peddling tied to their freebies.

      • Ms. Turtle says:

        Sunny, my thoughts exactly. Get your ire up about things that are more serious than where the royals vacationed and who did or didn’t pay for it. If the royal family didn’t pay for it, that benefits the uk taxpayer, right? Rich people lend rich people their homes all the time. What does the owner get out of it? Bragging rights! And also, I’ve lived in Europe and the month of August is a write off. Even if you’re in the office for half the month, no work is actually being done. The productivity in our office in August was insane.

      • JustVisiting says:

        As far as harmless goes… I think back to those funds allocated to the kp renovations and then rerenovations. Funds taken for that had to be taken elsewhere. The elsewhere was from a program to help disabled people who wanted to work be able to do so. Without that funding they wouldn’t have transportation and various other assistance to do so. All because there was too much purple.. seriously. That happened.
        So, not harmless. Thoughtless actions harm others. Continuing those Thoughtless actions is apathy and willful ignorance.

      • Tina says:

        The French police are exhausted and overworked due to the recent terror attacks. Going to France was both thoughtless and harmful. They could easily have gone to Italy, Spain, Portugal or any of the other European countries with sun.

    • Anett says:

      They are selling princess wigs. LOL They are so shady.

    • LAK says:

      There was more shade in the wig descriptor. The article says the wigs are a replica of Kate’s natural hair. It then goes on to say how much work goes into making her hair look glossy and reminds us that William once called it ‘nightmare hair’……followed by this picture of said princess wigs😮

      http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/08/13/00/37274D6600000578-0-image-m-59_1471044479195.jpg

      Talk about pinpricking her carefully built image of glossy hair.

      • Sixer says:

        HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

        You know, we are all busy laughing at LEGS and his paper knickers and t-shirts. And laughing is fun. But this is the BRF, for heavens sakes. Union Jack tea towels are one thing but princess wigs? I despair.

    • notasugarhere says:

      But Sixer, are your voodoo dolls made by child workers in Mexico like some of PP’s stuff is?

      • Sixer says:

        Oh no. All my workers earn the Living Wage and get a bonus at Christmas.

        Last year, we gave them Pin the Job on the Recalcitrant Princeling games, plus tickets to a polo event with overripe tomatoes to throw.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Sixer, you have made my Monday a lot better.

    • Christin says:

      Is there a bonus of princess clock and calendars, if one purchases in the next hour*?

      * This wig offer sounds perfect for a US infomercial, so I’ll elaborate on the joke, for those who don’t see them almost daily on the telly.

      Imagine a lengthy commercial about the party princess wig (‘Look like a princess, for only $19.99!”) ending with two repeats of “but wait, there’s more!” First item would be a clock, to anticipate when princeling might call. Plus calendars, to track the months and years. (Extra shipping and handling charges apply for future calendars, as noted in the infomercial fine print.)

    • Llamas says:

      I’m screaming

  4. Canadian Becks says:

    I have a deep disgust for wealthy people who have the means of paying for things, but are always looking to cadge freebies.

    Especially the type who actively look for freebies, whose eyes glint at the mention of freebies, whose ears perk up when they hear of freebies.

    I work for a person like that and I always have to remind myself to bite my tongue, and control my face.

    • sunny says:

      Why? You don’t get rich by spending money! Never hurts to ask for a deal. Someone somewhere is getting it, why not you? Or them, or whoever? I grew up around really rich people and they acted and lived just like middle class people. No fancy cars or mansiins or designer stuff…spending money on that stuff is dumb to them and I agree.

      • Montréalaise says:

        There’s a big difference between living below one’s means (aka ”The Millionaire Next Door” and living an extravagant lifestyle by mooching off others. The first is admirable, the second .. not so much.

      • notasugarhere says:

        W&K are taxpayer funded government representatives. Every time they get a freebie, what are they promising in return?

      • MinnFinn says:

        nota – That is my problem with the arrangement too.

        In my home (USA) state, government specifically forbids its employees from receiving any freebie because who are we kidding, it IS the giver attempting to buy/maintain favorable status. At Christmas, a vendor cannot even give a box of chocolates to their main contact person at the state.

        The other problem I have is free products and services should be declared on one’s tax returns, its value assessed at market/retail value and it should be taxed. In the USA, the plebs who win money in a casino pay 50% tax and we are also taxed for merchandise won at game shows or merchandise contests.

  5. Squiggisbig says:

    How exactly does one go about asking the family of a newly deceased person to borrow their private jet? Does etiquette require you wait until the body is cold? IF ONLY THERE WERE A PIPPA TIP FOR THIS SITUATION!!

    • Lucky Charm says:

      I think the arrangements were already in place, but they came home before he died anyway. They returned on a Friday and the Duke died the following Tuesday.

    • HappyMom says:

      He wasn’t dead when they left. He died during their trip.

    • Betti says:

      The duke died after they returned however it won’t stop them ‘asking’ the new duke to allow them to utilise the jet for free. Apparently the first time it was used after they’ve 2 used it the air con in the cockpit blew up.

      • Tourmaline says:

        Yeah, they made the “new duke” one of Prince George’s godparents to ensure the private plane, etc. connection stays strong. The Westminsters also own a huge hunting estate in Spain, the place where William and Jecca were boar-hunting together a few years back.

  6. HappyMom says:

    Have we discussed how they’ve scored a free family trip to Canada by announcing they’re bringing George and Charlotte to Canada (and have also requested a “personal” day in the trip?)

    • Betti says:

      Sweetie it will be several ‘private’ days/trips built into the freebie to Canada. That’s what they did during the India/Bhutan trip. This is going to be the same car crash. And I wonder how many Canadians will get the chance to view the Royal biscuit?

    • hmmm says:

      Justin Trudeau: forelock tugger.

      • notasugarhere says:

        And PR Hound

      • Natalie says:

        notasugar, I’m side-eyeing Trudeau for his invitation. It’s one thing that he’s obviously really good looking and takes a great picture, but that should be incidental. Those pictures of him with President Obama and President Nieto, and with Prince Harry are fun but they’re secondary to the real purpose of their visits. With the Cambridges, it seems purely about photogenic self-promotion.

    • mazzie says:

      As a Canadian, may I say: ugh, ugh, ugh, ugh. And ugh. Why are we spending money on these pointless fools?

      • Jaded says:

        I’m with you – as a Canadian I couldn’t give a rodent’s posterior about them and resent the money every Canadian has to spend to bring them over here to faff around, show her fanny, hair blowing all over the place, then have another vacation to recover. Grrrr…..I want my money back.

      • Montréalaise says:

        Because it’s a priceless opportunity for photo-ops for our PM and his family. Two photogenic young couples with equally photogenic children.

    • Kitty says:

      @Imqrious2, so are they bringing the kids?

    • TyrantDestroyed says:

      I rolled my eyes when I read about this request. I hope it rains a lot during their visit.

  7. Natalie says:

    Has anyone been reading the Ken Wharfe excerpts? I just read the one titled ‘Prince Harry would be a remarkable king. Sadly that won’t happen’ Apparently Harry has always been the one most liked. And Wharfe goes pretty in on William, calling him sly. The nanny, Olga Powell’s catchphrase was, “William, I love you but I don’t like you.” It also referenced a story I’d forgotten about. William was angry about Diana being too familiar with Wharfe and one day he pulled her towel off, leaving her completely naked in front of him.

    • Betti says:

      Diana is on record more than once saying that William was always a difficult child. I think he would have become the man he is now regardless of wether she lived or if the Middletons had never come into his life. This is who he really is. He’s become so arrogant that it can’t be hidden anymore.

      • Natalie says:

        I agree. It’s said so often that William would have been so different without the Middletons but he chose them. He’s comfortable and happy with them. They’re a match made in inauthenticity, slyness and grifter heaven.

        The towel story gets to me. That’s a hell of a thing to do to your own mother.

      • notasugarhere says:

        If he had been held accountable for his actions, he might have turned out differently. Might.

        At 34, time he stopped blaming his parents for making his privileged life so terribly terrible. His comments that offend working parents. The PR spin that Charles and Diana worked too much and didn’t make him the center of the Universe 24 hours a day. He needs to grow up.

      • msthang says:

        Bottom line, Chuck and Di spoiled him from the cradle, that surely didn’t help!!

    • LAK says:

      The only note i didn’t like in this particular excerpt was his revelation that the nanny frequently told William that he was loved, but not liked. It takes awhile for children to understand the difference and to constantly be told that you are not liked is really, really terrible thing to say to a child, no matter how much they are indulged elsewhere.

      • perplexed says:

        Although I don’t think she should have said that, I’m now wondering how terrible he was a kid that she felt compelled to say it to his face. Yikes.

      • ClaireB says:

        Now we are told to say that we love them but don’t like their behavior. Children cannot change themselves, but can change their behavior. I suppose it does make a difference, especially if repeated.

      • Snotface says:

        Totally agree LAK. That’s a terrible thing to say to a kid, even if they are a bit trying.

        That’s a good way of saying it Claire. I can’t imagine telling a kid repeatedly that I don’t like them. But saying their behavior is the problem is fine b/c they can change that.

      • LAK says:

        I agree Claire. Make clear that their behaviour is the problem, not them.

        Nanny Olga was an old school nanny, but that was a terrible thing to say to him by any era of nannying.

  8. Cerys says:

    Can’t say I’m surprised at the Dolittles scrounging freebies from all and sundry. People with money quite often do this while us lesser mortals have to scrimp to pay for everything. I hope the new duke of Westminster makes so much use of his plane that the Dolittles can’t get near it. It would be fun to see them on a easy jet package flight to Spain, trying to manage 2 children and their luggage. Lol

  9. Hazel says:

    I don’t get it. They have a big house in the country–and access to any of TQ’s places–and for vacation they choose another big house in the country? Granted, it’s s different country, but still. And it’s no where near a beach! Or a museum, a theater, hiking trails….

    • Kitty says:

      I wonder how much money William really has!

    • Montréalaise says:

      I though the BRP vacationed at Balmoral Castle in Scotland every August. Why didn’t the Cambridges join them there?

      • notasugarhere says:

        Because W&K almost always vacation outside of the UK? Because the Middletons are not welcome at Balmoral? W&K have only been photographed once at Balmoral, so I side-eye stories about them spending any time there.

        I’m wondering if Carole went with them to the French chateau, just like she accompanied them on the French skiing vacation.

      • Betti says:

        @NOTA -yes am wondering about QIL in waiting Carole as well. Wanna bet she tries to get to go on the Canadian trip using the kids as an excuse. She’s protecting her investment, but time will tell if she vacations with Pippa and James – wonder if she’ll invite herself to the honeymoon to make sure its been consummated – like way back when in the french courts the entire court would tuck the royal couple in and then stand listening at the door.

      • MinnFinn says:

        Because sunbathing nude on the terrace in Scotland — well pretty much year around it would be way too cold for that.

    • msthang says:

      Hazel, on Love Lola blog we have been having a discussion that, they may have gone their because Chopper needs emotional help, their is a shrink there!!!!

  10. mellie says:

    I was kind of mad at how these people were being treated and now I’m just kind of over them, they are just big mooches aren’t they? I mean really, they do just the minimum fun stuff, pop out a couple of good looking little ones and think they are just done with it all. The more I read about them, the more disgusting they become.

  11. Cricket says:

    Is there nowhere in any of their family homes they can’t fish? seems like a dig at Charles…

    do you think George and Charlotte will be in Pippa’s wedding? And will the Middleton’s commission a tiara for her to wear? And if Kate is the mad of honor and Spencer Matthews the best man, will we get photos of them walking out of the church together?

    • MinnFinn says:

      My theory is Willy cut a deal at the time he married. BP said ‘you and Kate have to agree to go on some tours every once inawhile or else I’m not paying for all of those potted trees Kate wants to spoil everyone’s view at Westminster.’ So Willy asked Kate for her short list for vacations. (Willy actualy said in one of his India speeches that he asked Kate which countries she would like to tour around the time they got married and that India was on her short list.) Kate’s short list included Oz, NZ, Canadian wilderness and Manhattan. Kate must have really liked Canadian wilderness first time around, so they’re going a 2nd time because Canada’s fishing is so very very different than northern Scotland.

  12. seesittellsit says:

    Of such fabric are revolutions (eventually) made! If they paid a penny for it, I’d be surprised.

    I can just hear Carole now: “What is the point of placing one’s daughters so beautifully if they can’t enjoy the perks without the peasants whingeing, I ask you?!”

  13. KOri says:

    Michael Green also has a history in PR–before he owned ITV–maybe he can give #poorJason some tips. Another interesting tidbit is that he now practises psychoanalyst–maybe he can work on William.

  14. Llamas says:

    These people make my brain explode. I just can’t say anymore. That Gatsby quote is so perfect for them:

    “I couldn’t forgive him or like him, but I saw that what he had done was, to him, entirely justified. It was all very careless and confused. They were careless people, Tom and Daisy – they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together and let other people clean up the mess they had made […].”

    They ARE the Buchanans.

  15. Starlight says:

    I am not going to criticise the chateau as it was probably home from home let’s face it Amner is like a chateau in the middle of the deep countryside anyway August is a month notoriously taken as off by the aristocracy. I have to say though that I am absolutely aghast at those princess wigs on their company website it looks like cheap and they are making money from their connections yuk! Yuk! and yuk!

  16. Kaz says:

    They’re not very adventurous are they? Another big house in the country. Oh I suppose the staff may have spoken a different language so that would be exotic. Why didn’t they go to a nice hot beach and let the kids play in the sand?