Royal Gossip
July 27, 2017, 01:47:13 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Duchy of Lancaster  (Read 12828 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Nighthawk
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 5471


« on: July 18, 2012, 03:01:53 am »

Queen's private Duchy of Lancaster estate rises in value above £400m for first time, accounts show
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/queen-elizabeth-II/9406904/Queens-private-Duchy-of-Lancaster-estate-rises-in-value-above-400m-for-first-time-accounts-show.html
Quote
The refurbishment of Wellington House, an office block on the Strand in London, as well as the purchase of a new agricultural estate in Lincolnshire have led to a 5.8 per cent increase in the value of the Duchy’s property portfolio, from £383m in 2011 to £405m now.

The Duchy not only provides the Queen with her private income but also funds the official duties of the Duke of York, the Earl of Wessex, the Princess Royal and several other members of the Royal family.

It is separate from the £32.3m in taxpayers’ money received by the Queen to cover her own official duties, travel costs and upkeep of Royal palaces.

must be nice to live high on the hog like that no wonder the other royals can fligh one way to places in private jets and helicopters
Logged
YooperModerator
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12944



« Reply #1 on: July 18, 2012, 11:45:12 pm »

The portfolio value is 405M* but the actual profit is 13M quite a different number
If you compare the numbers to last year Lancaster actually did worse, she had +5% in value, yeah but -2% in profit.
It's still a lot of cash, more then 1M/month, (I wouldn't mind a pay check like that sigh)

The Cornwall duchy is doing even better: value of 728M (+7%) and a yearly profit of 26.5 M (+2.8%) of which in the end 18.3M goes to Charles' account (approx 1.5M/month)

*all numbers are in £
in $: 633M/20M (HM) and 1.1B/41M/28M (PC)

in €: 516M/16M (HM) and 927M/33M/23.3M (PC)
Logged


\\\"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.\\\"  Thomas Jefferson
Magnolia
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3929


« Reply #2 on: July 19, 2012, 01:05:32 am »

Quote
Queen's private Duchy of Lancaster estate rises in value above £400m for first time, accounts show
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/queen-elizabeth-II/9406904/Queens-private-Duchy-of-Lancaster-estate-rises-in-value-above-400m-for-first-time-accounts-show.html
Quote
The refurbishment of Wellington House, an office block on the Strand in London, as well as the purchase of a new agricultural estate in Lincolnshire have led to a 5.8 per cent increase in the value of the Duchy’s property portfolio, from £383m in 2011 to £405m now.
Alot of money and still sponging off the public.

Quote
It is separate from the £32.3m in taxpayers’ money received by the Queen to cover her own official duties, travel costs and upkeep of Royal palaces.
The thing thats bad is that it's mandatory that your taxes have to go to them whether you want to or not.

Logged


THIS IS YOU:NET- FXCKER A PERSON WHO SPENDS DAYS ON THE INTERNET AT A TIME USUALLY LATE AT NIGHT OR VERY EARLY IN THE MORNING HE OR SHE IS A RECLUSE AND A NET-FXCKER! THIS IS YOU:NET-JUNKIES TEND TO NOT HAVE LIVES ALTHOUGH ON RARE OCCASIONS ONE OF THEM UNWITTINGLY DOWNLOADS IT FROM THE INTERNET
Kuei Fei
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 35794


Moderator/I'm so royal I piss blue


WWW
« Reply #3 on: July 19, 2012, 12:33:41 pm »

Quote
The Queen’s private estate, the Duchy of Lancaster, has risen in value to more than £400 million for the first time, its annual accounts show.

It is separate from the £32.3m in taxpayers’ money received by the Queen to cover her own official duties, travel costs and upkeep of Royal palaces.

SHE HAS NO BUSINESS GETTING MONEY FROM TAXPAYERS if she is sitting on that much (or more) money! If she's been getting money since the start of her reign, that means there is billions being moved into her private bank account and that also means that the taxpayers have been funding an institution that can easily be self sustaining. Something that can easily be funded on it's own with plenty left over to pay for personal wants. How does she live with herself doing this?

Quote
The portfolio value is 405M* but the actual profit is 13M quite a different number
If you compare the numbers to last year Lancaster actually did worse, she had +5% in value, yeah but -2% in profit.
It's still a lot of cash, more then 1M/month, (I wouldn't mind a pay check like that


Either way, that is more than enough to support herself and when you throw in other aspects, I am certain that she should be more than able to pay her own way.
Logged

To receive regular news, go to "@gossippsychotic" to get updates from various other gossip websites such as "Downtown Chatter" or "Royal Gossip Psychotic" and end up reading all about all sorts of peccadilloes.
leogirl
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3140


« Reply #4 on: July 19, 2012, 07:18:49 pm »

Well, the thing is, it wouldn't really be a monarchy if it wasn't funded by the people. If she supported herself (which I'm sure she's more than capable of doing) the RF would just be like any other wealthy landowning family.
Logged
YooperModerator
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12944



« Reply #5 on: July 21, 2012, 01:45:29 am »

Yup that the main idea: you as a country pay a family to be your monarchy even though they don't really need your money! (bet your happy you're a yank now huh! easter-lol)
On the other hand if they wouldn't receive funding from the gov any more they could easily tell the ppl "to p*ss off and keep your nose out of our accounts".
They could do what they want with the Lancaster duchy and (if there is a POW) the Cornwall duchy.
The funds they get are a leach to keep an eye on their finances and what they do with them.
Logged


\\\"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.\\\"  Thomas Jefferson
Yooper
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11112


Moderator


« Reply #6 on: July 21, 2012, 05:50:07 am »

Is there any real plausible solution to the monarchy moving forward, say, in the next 5 years or so?  Does anybody think that HM will dismantle the whole show (she can do that, yes?  could be wrong) when she gets on in years?  She's a lot of things, but I don't think she's stupid and must see that her legacy will fall apart at an appalling rate after her death, God forbid for a bit, so we can figure something out.

She can't be replaced.  That's a given.  PC/Cams will do their thing, but I see him hiding out more and more after the coronation and doing some goofy things of which some are good but he may receive ridicule.  He's a real fighter for recycling all over the royal residences, which is cool, but drives the staff to distraction because he digs in it (got that from the Housekeeper's Diary - if you don't have it, Akasha, I'll give you my copy when you get here).

All in all, they're a nutty bunch.  Somebody's got to be putting together a plan of some sort to make the transition without them.  No?
Logged


\"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.\"  Thomas Jefferson
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« Reply #7 on: July 21, 2012, 09:20:12 am »

Yup that the main idea: you as a country pay a family to be your monarchy even though they don't really need your money! (bet your happy you're a yank now huh! easter-lol)
On the other hand if they wouldn't receive funding from the gov any more they could easily tell the ppl "to p*ss off and keep your nose out of our accounts".
They could do what they want with the Lancaster duchy and (if there is a POW) the Cornwall duchy.
The funds they get are a leach to keep an eye on their finances and what they do with them.

Akasha both Duchies are not the private estates of HM or the PoW. It is a constitutional arranngement which allows them to take the profits but they can never sell any of it nor claim its assets. This arrangement only stands if there is still a constiutional monarchy if there isn't the profts will go to the Treasury.

There is also the highly contentious matter of Bon Vacancia which means if anyone dies without making a will in the Duchies all their estate (no matter how modest) goes to HM or PoW. Until recently all court fines levied n Lancashire went to HM too but this had now been changed.

The only private estates belonging to HM and by inheritance Charles is Balmoral and Sandringham and I have a copy of Hansard from Victoria's reign wich shows taxpayer's money was going into both of these when they were supposed to be privately run.
Logged

" Kate, Pippa and Carole Middleton seen at Manolo Blahnik today.. overheard asking if they carried shoes for cloven hooves. "
meememe
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2163



« Reply #8 on: July 21, 2012, 09:33:14 am »

Can I remind people what that money from the taxpayers is for:  it is to cover the costs of the monarch's office and official duties - those costs have to be paid.

If they aren't paid as a lump sum upfront then the monarch would expect them to be paid for on an event by event basis e.g. the government wants the monarch to host a State Visit - who pays - the taxpayers of course.  Currently that is what the Civil List and in the future the Sovereign's Grant is for - to cover those costs. 

It is all a matter of how it is paid - on an event by event basis or as a single payment.

The advantages for the way it is done now is that the same people can be working for the monarch both for private and public events and so build up a rapport and an understanding.  If done separately then the monarch's private staff won't be working on the State Visits - so they will have to have part-timers who want be up the the same standard as those who work permanently for the monarch.

The same with State Visits abroad - currently they are funded from the Civil List/Sovereign's Grants - but if that was ended then they would still be funded by the government but again on a case by case basis.

The other major thing that the Civil List covers is the cost of the office staff for the Head of State - the staff in the west wing of the White House for instance - that staff would still have to be paid by the taxpayers.  They would have to liase with the monarch's personal staff to ensure that the monarch doesn't arrange a personal event that clashes with a state one - currently having the same staff do both means limited if any clashes.

The Sovereign's Grants are also to cover the costs of the maintenance of the state owned palaces and art collections etc.  Those costs would also have to be paid regardless of how the money is spent.

If the monarch didn't get a lump sum to cover the expenses of the job of Head of State the money would still have to be paid by the taxpayers. 

It seems to me as if people here actually expect the British public to employ a Head of State but not pay them for the expenses of the job - they don't actually get a salary for the job afterall.
Logged
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« Reply #9 on: July 21, 2012, 09:48:46 am »

The problem with all this funding is it comes from various sources and much of it lacks in transparency. The Foreign Office mostly picks up the tab for overseas visits over and above any civil list/SSG funding on top of the costs borne by whichever host nation there is.

The MoD has also been shown to pay for private flights etc as these have popped up in Hansard when MPs have discovered such as Charles taking a £29,000 private flight for purely personal matters. The security bill is separate and no-one will confirm but is considered to be skywards of £200 million.

On a local level local councils pay for royal visits and this comes, not from the tax budget, but from council tax which each household has to pay and whenever a royal visits a  charity or a place the host will cover various costs involved - probably the most recent example was the £600,000 extra costs for HM to open the Bomber Command memorial which nearly bankrupted the appeal organisers. They had to use the Royal Parks security, vetting procedures, staging etc because a) thy had invited HM and b)no-one is allowed to contract out of the RP's various arrangements.

There has been a row in Manchester during the Jubilee Tour when it emerged they had paid out £40,000 to host the Queen while also cutting services and staff. £40k is actually on the low side for one of these visits.

MMM is correct though we always have to pay for a Head of State be it king or president. I believe the big debate is does the taxayer want to continue funding an inherited head of state. It's the hereditary aspect that will be the key point in future.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2012, 09:51:38 am by True Brit » Logged

" Kate, Pippa and Carole Middleton seen at Manolo Blahnik today.. overheard asking if they carried shoes for cloven hooves. "
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« Reply #10 on: July 21, 2012, 10:05:36 am »

Timed out but this is a prime example of how other departments pick up the royal tab. It shows how the DJ cost the MoD almost £900,000 pounds. Wait til we get the Olympics bill in too.

http://royalgossip.forumprofi.de/index.php/topic,4772.0.html
Logged

" Kate, Pippa and Carole Middleton seen at Manolo Blahnik today.. overheard asking if they carried shoes for cloven hooves. "
meememe
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2163



« Reply #11 on: July 21, 2012, 11:41:48 am »

TB

You are right of course that it is the fact that the monarch is hereditary that is the problem not that the taxpayers have to pay as they pay in all nations for the Head of State.

Logged
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« Reply #12 on: September 10, 2012, 03:58:57 pm »

This really should be a sub thread to British Royal Finances (mods feel free to make it such). This isn't new material as it dates back to 2005 but it is highly significant as it is a meeting of the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee (PAC) which summoned representatives from both the Duchy of Cornwall and Lancaster to answer some far reachng questions.

It is going to take me a while to disseminate the report as it is dozen of pages long but we need to start somewhere. Furher I will concentrate on the Duchy of Cornwall for now as most of the controversy stems from this estate. Also if anyone has any evidence which disputes this account please post it but don't include anything given out by the Duchy or the PoW etc as they are simply propaganda to support their claims.

So let's begin with the origins of the Duchy which was created in the 14th century so the Black Prince could enjoy the considerable profits being generated by Cornwall's tin mines and since then it has passed on to the eldest son of the reigning monarch. When there isn't an eldest son/POW - such as the present Queen Elizabeth - the income reverts to the Treasury.

Moves have recently been made by David Cameron to change this if W&K's firstborn is a girl but this depends on constitutional law. The POW is allowed to take the entire profit of the Duchy of Cornwall for his own income under a constitutional arrangement. The estate is not his to dispose of and any transactions over £200k have to be approved by the Treasury.

Now we had a new poster a couple of days ago who claimed PC owns the Duchy of Corwall "lock, stock and barrel" - it's understandable that some would think that as the Duchy websites claim it is privately owned and they keep pushing this line constantly to the public in this BBC report (at the end) it says:

Quote
And it stressed that the Duchy is a private estate, not a public body.

It is deliberately misleading and a legal tribunal in 2011 established it was a public authority (more of that a few paras down)

You can see quite clearly that Prince Charles does not own it "lock,stock and barrel". Indeed MPs in the PAC report accused him of running "his own private fiefdom" What other fully owned private estate has to be vetted by the Treasury or brought before PAC's of the House of Commons? What other privately owned estate gets reilef from capital gains and corporation tax? I am sure the Duke of Devonshire would appreciate such breaks. According to this week's Telegraph he is about to auction off a Titian sketch to raise a few million to continue work on Chatsworth House.

Important ruling in 2011

Further, a year or so ago trouble arrived on the Duchy's doorstep in the shape of an environmental campaigner called Michael Bruton and a whole load of oysters. Apparently the Duchy was farming non native species off the coast of Falmouth and Mr Bruton simply demanded an environmental impact report under the 2004 legislation.

The Duchy said it didn't have to provide one and played the old private estate card so Mr Bruton lodged a Freedom of Information request which was turned down and ended up on the Information Commissioner's desk. This argument played out right up to a law tribunal - expensive barristers the works - where the judges unanimously agreed that the Duchy of Cornwall is a public authority as below:

Quote
The Tribunal’s decision in Bruton v IC and The Duchy of Cornwall & The Attorney General to HRH the Prince of Wales (EA/2010/0182) was published yesterday. The issue was whether the Duchy is a “public authority” for the purposes of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004. The Tribunal decided that it is. 11KBW’s Karen Steyn and Joseph Barrett appeared for the Appellant, Amy Rogers (led by Jonathan Crow QC) appeared for the Duchy and Attorney General, and I appeared for the Information Commissioner

Full story here if you follow the two links marked. There's a lot more to this but the Duchy also is entitled to deceased persons's property who die intestate something called Bon Vacantia and it also operates the harbours in the Scilliy Islands which is also a public function so it's not just molluscs and the deceased.

http://www.panopticonblog.com/2011/11/04/duchy-of-cornwall-is-a-public-authority/

I believe an appeal is under way although I haven't seen a date and suspect they may leave it alone as it will prise open the ringpull of the worm can  little more. The reason for starting with this is it does bring the story we are about to unravel up-to-date.

Meanwhile back in 2005
I will highlight the BBC report of the 2005 PAC meeting and get back to going through the report but please add any questions as I have a lots of documents on this - and even then it's extremely complex.

Quote
But MPs - who also analysed the Duchy of Lancaster, which provides an income for the Queen - asked the Treasury to justify why the duchies are not subject to corporation or capital gains tax.
 
MPs called for the National Audit Office (NAO) to be given the power to audit the royal books.
 
They also expressed their "surprise" that the prince had the right to determine the level of income.

And this is the difference in approach between PC and is mother The Queen

Quote
They said the prince should follow the example of the Queen who has no role in the management of the Duchy of Lancaster
.

And basically he was told to butt out of the Duchy's management (so much for owning it lock, stock and barrel)
 
Quote
Prince Charles should stop managing the Duchy of Cornwall, the estate which provides his main income, say MPs who have analysed the Duchy's accounts.


But of course the slippery buggers who run the Duchies see it very differently which is why the 2011 environmental hearing is so crucial.

Quote
He added: "It seems that the Public Accounts Committee may have misunderstood what the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall are.
 
"They are not public bodies. They are well-run private estates, specifically created to provide private income for the sovereign and the heir to the throne."
 
Asked whether the NAO would be allowed to audit the books, Prince Charles' spokesman said: "This is a private estate. It's not a public estate...private estates are not looked at by the NAO."

Here's the whole story from 2005.
 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cornwall/4721517.stm

Here endeth the first lesson.  eating cookies
Logged

" Kate, Pippa and Carole Middleton seen at Manolo Blahnik today.. overheard asking if they carried shoes for cloven hooves. "
Leila
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1399


« Reply #13 on: September 10, 2012, 04:21:43 pm »

Thank you  thankyou worship flower
Logged
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« Reply #14 on: September 10, 2012, 04:48:15 pm »

 hello No probs Leila.

BTW under the Sovereign Support Grant which replaces the Civil List in 2013 the National Audit Office (NAO) WILL now audit the books so one step forward towards the the Duchy being audited.

Quote
Asked whether the NAO would be allowed to audit the books, Prince Charles' spokesman said: "This is a private estate. It's not a public estate...private estates are not looked at by the NAO."
Logged

" Kate, Pippa and Carole Middleton seen at Manolo Blahnik today.. overheard asking if they carried shoes for cloven hooves. "
Alexandrine
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 13927



« Reply #15 on: January 22, 2013, 02:42:05 pm »

Rafe Heydel-Mankoo ‏@RafHM
Clegg does not understand the status of the Duchy of Lancaster and mistakes it for a peerage title.

Rafe Heydel-Mankoo ‏@RafHM
Rees-Mogg calls Clegg out on the issue and asks if the Deputy PM is stating that the Bill will separate the Duchy from Crown for 1st time.
Logged



“Three things are to be looked to in a building: that it stand on the right spot, that it be securely founded, that it be successfully executed.” ~ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« Reply #16 on: July 02, 2013, 03:28:15 pm »

The peasants are revolting in North Yorkshire over demands for various payments from the Duchy of Lancaster. The village - Goathland - is very picturesque and became very popular with tourists following a long running TV programme called Heartbeat which was set in 1960s North Yorkshire.

Quote
A Whitby businessman says he has been pushed to the brink of bankruptcy by the Duchy of Lancaster which owns thousands of acres of land in Goathland.
James Fearnley says if he doesn’t pay £20,000 to the Duchy, whose revenues go to the Queen, by today he will be hit with a £120,000 legal bill which means he could be forced to sell his home.
Mr Fearnley (67), who lives in Goathland, but researches and manufacturers natural medicine and runs a community health project in Whitby, is compiling a list of other villagers and organisations also with concerns, such as:
l Goathland parish council which has to pay £15 a year for the siting of a memorial bench on the village common and £70 for the village’s two bus shelters.
l Four homeowners who have to pay £300 a year for water pipes running across 50 yards of Duchy land.
l Former hotel owner Adrian Caulder who had to pay £40,000 to the Duchy for change of use when he converted his hotel into four houses back in 2008, one of which he now lives in.

http://www.whitbygazette.co.uk/news/local/pay-up-on-the-orders-of-the-queen-1-5802099

Mr Fearnley has also started a website and Facebook page called Stand Up to the Duchy. What I find interesting is that this is True Blue territory and these people would once upon a time be hoisting the flags and bunting to celebrate some royal event. the times they are indeed a'changing.

http://standuptotheduchy.com/

This story also made last weekend's Times but it's behind a paywall but here's an extract.


Quote
The Duchy, which provides an income to the Royal Household, owns much of the surrounding countryside and has long claimed ownership to a strip of common land that runs through the village.
Its 400 residents are “landlocked” by the strip which separates driveways from the road. In recent years the peppercorn rents for access have risen steeply.
New residents are also being asked to pay hundreds of pounds for the right to receive water through pipes which flow under Duchy land. The Duchy even charges the parish council £50 a year for a memorial bench on the common.
James Fearnley, 67, a local landowner, faces a £40,000 legal bill after the Duchy complained that the cars entering his overflow car park were running illegally over an eight foot strip of their land.
Mr Fearnley, who runs a business making natural medicines, said the problem has grown ever since the Duchy registered ownership with the Land Registry and appointed private land agents to collect rents.
He said: “Before that the Duchy were paternalistic, decent chaps who worked with the village and only charged peppercorn rents.
“There was a day, not long ago, when Duchy representatives were greeted with respect if not reverence when they came to Goathland but times have changed. The new agents appear more like feudal tax collectors.”

And a comment from the village's Member of Parliament


Quote
Robert Goodwill, MP for Scarborough and Whitby, said: “This seems to be a case of a ransom strip being used to extract payments from unsuspecting home owners and businesses who had, quite reasonably, assumed that they had a right to access their property from the highway.

“These land agents acting on behalf of the Duchy of Lancaster are using the threat of expensive legal action to force people to pay up.

“Sometimes they pounce just as contracts are on the point of being exchanged on a house sale. The vendor has to cough up or risk losing the buyer.

“I wonder what Her Majesty, who is also the Duke of Lancaster, would think about these shenanigans being carried out in her name?”

 


http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/money/tax/article3802362.ece
« Last Edit: July 03, 2013, 12:51:57 pm by Alexandrine » Logged

" Kate, Pippa and Carole Middleton seen at Manolo Blahnik today.. overheard asking if they carried shoes for cloven hooves. "
Tatiana
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1721


I come from a long line of Monarchists.


« Reply #17 on: July 02, 2013, 03:33:42 pm »

Absolutely Horrid.
Logged

Kuei Fei
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 35794


Moderator/I'm so royal I piss blue


WWW
« Reply #18 on: July 03, 2013, 01:00:18 am »

Quote
“I wonder what Her Majesty, who is also the Duke of Lancaster, would think about these shenanigans being carried out in her name?”

I'm sure HM knows everything about it and approves.

Grubbing from the Civil List
Grubbing from investments
Grubbing from the Crown Estates
Logged

To receive regular news, go to "@gossippsychotic" to get updates from various other gossip websites such as "Downtown Chatter" or "Royal Gossip Psychotic" and end up reading all about all sorts of peccadilloes.
meememe
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2163



« Reply #19 on: July 03, 2013, 03:05:54 am »

Civil List doesn't exist anymore. It has been replaced with a payment the equivalent of 15% of the income of the Crown Estates with the other 85% going to the Treasury to run the country.

The money she does get from the Crown Estates - now called the Soveriegn's Grant - is to pay the expenses of the Head of State such as for State Visits, official engagements including investitures and garden parties, and the maintenance of the state owned royal palaces. It isn't for her personal expenses.

The Duchy of Lancaster was set up centuries ago to give the monarch a private income as the Crown Estates income was to run the government and then George III decided to hand over the vast majority of the Crown Estates income to the government with the understanding that the government would also pay for the official duties - which happens in every country - Heads of State have their official duties funded by the country of which they are Head of State - why should Britain be any different?

The current Soveriegn Grant - to cover all expenses in 38 million pounds - in 2000 - 1 to cover the same amount of things The Queen received 35 million pounds - so she is 3 million pounds a year more than she was getting 13 years ago. Hardly keeping up with the costs of things.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines | Imprint Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!