Prince Harry facing 'forensic' scrutiny warns Ranvir Singh
When you subscribe we will use the information you provide to send you these newsletters. Sometimes they’ll include recommendations for other related newsletters or services we offer. Our Privacy Notice explains more about how we use your data, and your rights. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, have defended their claim they were “literally cut off” by Prince Charles, 72, following their decision to quit the Royal Family – despite Clarence House accounts showing the couple continued to receive money from the Duchy of Cornwall until the early summer 2020. Speaking in their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey in March, Harry told the chatshow star they signed lucrative deals with Netflix and Spotify after being “cut-off” by the future king.
Harry said: “[The Netflix deal] was suggested by somebody else by the point of where my family literally cut me off financially, and I had to afford security for us.
“[They cut me off] in the first quarter of 2020.”
But Clarence House accounts covering the year from April 2020 reveal Charles supported both his sons and their wives to the tune of £4.5m.
A senior Clarence House spokesman said the Sussexes received a “substantial” sum from the future king.
He added: “That funding ceased in the summer of last year. The couple are now financially independent.”
Asked whether the Sussexes and Clarence House’s accounts were at odds, the spokesman said: “All I can tell you are the facts.”
Separately, The Sovereign Grant report is out today and shows Harry and Meghan paid back the full £2.4m taxpayers spent on refurbishing Frogmore Cottage in Windsor which caused controversy at the time.
Harry and Meghan’s response to claims Charles gave them ‘substantial sum’
Harry and Meghan have responded to the royal finance revelations in a statement that supports the claim they made in March, claiming the accounts refer to “two different timelines.”
A Sussex spokesman said: “You are conflating two different timelines and it is inaccurate to suggest there is a contradiction.
“The Duke’s comments during the Oprah Winfrey interview were in reference to the first quarter of the fiscal year which starts in April.
“The same date the transitional year the Sandringham agreement began and that is in alignment with the Clarence House accounts.”
Harry and Meghan ‘amply aware’ children unlikely to get titles [EXCLUSIVE]
Lady Louise Windsor: Sophie’s daughter could become princess soon [INSIGHT]
Kate Middleton ‘rejects royal fashion’ and ‘modifies monarchy’ [PICTURES]
Meghan and Harry quit the Firm in March 2020 and relocated to California shortly afterwards which is where they have been based ever since.
The couple have gained financial independence from the Royal Family by signing lucrative commercial deals and it is understood they no longer receive monetary support from Charles.
Harry and Meghan’s daughter Lilibet was born earlier this month and their baby’s name choice prompted controversy due to conflicting reports around whether or not they asked the Queen’s permission to use her nickname.
While Meghan and Harry’s son Archie does not have a royal title he was entitled to his father’s Earl of Dumbarton subsidiary title at birth.
New reports claim the couple rejected the peerage for their son because the name contained the word “dumb.”
A source told the Telegraph: “They didn’t like the idea of Archie being called the Earl of Dumbarton because it began with the word ‘dumb’. They were worried about how that might look.”
Another insider claimed: “It wasn’t just Meghan who pointed out the potential pitfalls, it also bothered Harry.”
Archie and Lili did not receive HRH styles and royal titles at birth but could get them when Charles becomes king.
Source: Read Full Article