Chunks of Prince’s Andrew’s Royal Lodge lease agreement were redacted to conceal his ‘peppercorn rent’ when it was submitted to the Land Registry 20 years ago.
The full version of the lease was disclosed on Monday reads: ‘Rent means one peppercorn (if demanded) per annum’ – whereas the redacted version cut off the last six words, reading instead as just: ‘Rent means’.
Another clause which would have shown the public that the disgraced former royal has been living in the lavish estate rent free was also redacted.
The uncensored version says Andrew is obligated ‘to pay the rent if demanded’, with the ‘if’ part of the phrase implying that any rent on the property is a nominal one.
However, the public version simply states an obligation ‘to pay the rent’, with the words ‘if demanded’ removed.
Whilst it is not illegal to withhold this information, it is uncommon.
A source told The Times the redactions would have come from Andrew’s representative when they submitted the lease agreement.
They said ‘commercially sensitive’ information is allowed to be redacted and the act itself is not ‘illegitimate’ – but added that this meant ‘the public had no idea how little he was paying’.
The full version of the lease was disclosed on Monday reads: ‘Rent means one peppercorn (if demanded) per annum’
Whereas the redacted version cut off the last six words, reading instead as just: ‘Rent means’.
In the newly released unredacted version, another clause also shows the line ‘if demanded’ was removed in the original submission
The redacted version reads: ‘To pay the Rent’ , with ‘if demanded’ removed, which would have shown the public that Andrew only had to pay if he was asked – a clear marker of a ‘peppercorn rent’ agreement
‘It is obviously nowhere near the commercial rates or even a basic level,’ the source said.
Copies of lease agreements are available for anyone to access online via the Land Registry.
Personal details and information are commonly redacted, but financial information, such as nominal ground rents, are usually included.
The Land Registry’s latest guidance on lease agreement submission states that the redaction of rent and rent-free periods may be allowed if they relate to a commercial entity and therefore would be considered ‘commercially sensitive’ – but this does not apply to private individuals.
It is unclear if the guidance was the same when Andrew signed the lease in 2003.
The responsibility to submit the copies falls on the property’s buyer, who is allowed to handle the documents themselves or through a legal professional.
There has been an increasing pressure on Andrew to vacate the luxury 30-room property on the Windsor Great Park estate after his rent-free living arrangements were uncovered and new details about his links to Jeffrey Epstein came to light.
Sir Keir Starmer yesterday said he would back a parliamentary inquiry into the disgraced Prince’s living arrangements.
It came after Sir Ed Davey said an inquiry by a select committee should be able to grill witnesses ‘including the current occupant’ – a reference to Andrew, who last week announced he would stop using his Duke of York title to avoid distracting from the work of the King and the Royal Family.
Speaking at Prime Minister’s Questions in the Commons today the Liberal Democrat leader said: ‘Given the revelations about Royal Lodge, does the Prime Minister agree that this house needs to properly scrutinise the Crown Estate to ensure taxpayers’ interest are protected?
Chunks of Prince’s Andrew’s Royal Lodge lease agreement were redacted to conceal his ‘peppercorn rent’ when it was submitted to the Land Registry 20 years ago
The former Duke of York and his ex wife Sarah Ferguson have been living rent-free at Royal Lodge in Windsor Park (pictured) for over two decades
‘The Chancellor (Rachel Reeves) herself has said the current arrangements are wrong, so will the Prime Minister support a select committee inquiry, so all those involved can be called for evidence, including the current occupant?’
Sir Keir replied: ‘It’s important in relation to all Crown properties that there is proper scrutiny and I would certainly support that.’
Senior Tory Robert Jenrick said it was ‘about time Prince Andrew took himself off to live in private’ as ‘the public are sick of him’.
Yesterday, it was announced Andrew will be asked to give evidence about his connection to the late American paedophile financier in front of a US committee which is ‘extremely interested’ in hearing from him.
Stephen Lynch, a senior member of the US House Oversight Committee, revealed he wanted to speak to the King’s brother ‘regarding his involvement in all of this’.
The Democratic congressman added that he was ‘sure’ an invitation would be issued to Andrew about his association with sex trafficker Epstein.
Mr Lynch’s committee is currently scrutinising the bombshell documents known as the ‘Epstein files’, and Andrew faced renewed backlash after appearing in the latest papers tied to Epstein’s estate which were published by the committee last Friday.
But the 65-year-old royal cannot be subpoenaed to attend a hearing because he is a UK citizen, and it would therefore be his choice whether or not to give evidence.
The Prince’s links to Epstein have dominated headlines recently with fresh focus on his sex accuser Virginia Giuffre’s claims after her posthumous book was published.
At the beginning of the week, The Mail on Sunday revealed that Andrew tried to involve the Metropolitan Police and one of Queen Elizabeth’s most senior aides in a campaign to smear Virginia Giuffre, who had accused him of assaulting her as a teenager.
A bombshell email obtained exposed how Andrew asked his taxpayer-funded police bodyguard to investigate the ‘lying’ young woman.
Yesterday, it was revealed Andrew will be asked to give evidence about his connection to the late American paedophile financier in front of a US committee which is ‘extremely interested’ in hearing from him (Pictured: Jeffrey Epstein and Prince Andrew in Central Park in 2011)
Virginia Giuffre photographed with Prince Andrew and Ghislaine Maxwell in London in 2001
Shockingly, the prince passed on details of her date of birth and social security number, presumably given to him by Epstein.
He also claimed Virginia, who took her own life earlier this year, had criminal convictions, a claim which has not been backed up by any evidence or confirmed by police and has been strongly denied by her family.
An earlier email exposé proved that Andrew lied to Buckingham Palace and the British public when he claimed he had cut off all contact with his close friend in December 2010, following Epstein’s release from prison on child-sex charges.
Twelve weeks later he emailed the paedophile financier to say they were ‘in this together’ and sickeningly expressed his wish to ‘play some more soon’.
His ex wife Sarah Ferguson, who has also been living in Royal Lodge, came under fire in recent weeks as astonishing new emails claimed Epstein had secretly bankrolled her for 15 years.
The convicted paedophile complained to friends about the disgraced duchess’s scrounging ways in messages that suggest his financial support went far beyond the £15,000 she admitted taking from him.
In the previously unseen emails, Epstein reveals Fergie was so desperate to cosy up to him that ‘she was the first to celebrate’ his release from jail ‘with her two daughters in tow’. Princess Beatrice would have been 20 at the time and Eugenie 19, the same age as many of his victims.
The shocking claims are contained in a huge tranche of documents under review by the US Congress. They are set to be released once they have been redacted to protect the identity of hundreds of young girls Epstein raped and sexually abused.
Andrew’s ex wife Sarah Ferguson, who has also been living in Royal Lodge, came under fire in recent weeks as astonishing new emails claimed Epstein had secretly bankrolled her for 15 years
Last month, the MoS revealed how Fergie wrote to Epstein calling him a ‘supreme friend’, just weeks after giving an interview claiming she would ‘never have anything to do with’ the sex offender ever again – reviving the scandal that saw her and Andrew relinquish their titles on Friday.
In the London Evening Standard interview of March 7, 2011 Fergie issued a ‘heartfelt apology’ for accepting £15,000 from Epstein and called it ‘a giant error of judgment’.
The comment angered the financier, who sent an email to his friend, French modelling agent Jean-Luc Brunel, that day, complaining: ‘The duchess that I have financially helped for 15 years said that she wants nothing to do with a paedophile and child sex abuser. It has caused quite a stir.’
Brunel was later arrested on rape charges and killed himself in jail in 2022, three years after Epstein’s own jail suicide.
Epstein demanded Fergie write him a public letter of apology over the interview and threatened to sue her if she did not.
‘ The preceding article may include information circulated by third parties ’
‘ Some details of this article were extracted from the following source www.celebrity.land.co.uk ’
