Prince Harry has threatened the Authorities with authorized motion over its choice to take away his taxpayer-funded safety, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

Attorneys performing for Harry, who stepped down from Royal duties two years in the past, have written a ‘pre-action protocol’ letter to the Dwelling Workplace, indicating they’ll search a judicial assessment if continued safety just isn’t offered by the UK.

If the case proceeds, it’ll result in a battle within the Excessive Courtroom between Ministers and Prince Harry.

The Queen is known to have been made conscious of her grandson’s motion, which is regarded as the primary time a member of the Royal Household has introduced a case in opposition to Her Majesty’s Authorities.

A supply stated: ‘Harry’s argument in a nutshell is: ‘You bought the regulation improper.’ He feels the choice to take away his safety was improper. Pre-action protocol was despatched by Harry’s legal professionals to the Dwelling Workplace a few months in the past. That is basically a precursor to a judicial assessment.’

Suggesting why Harry could have chosen now – two years after ‘Megxit’ – to launch his authorized bid, the supply added: ‘When Harry got here again final April for Prince Philip’s funeral, he was given safety. However when he got here again in the summertime, he wasn’t.’ 

Prince Harry has threatened the Government with legal action over its decision to remove his taxpayer-funded security, The Mail on Sunday can reveal. (Above, Harry and Meghan with bodyguards in New Zealand in 2018)

Prince Harry has threatened the Authorities with authorized motion over its choice to take away his taxpayer-funded safety, The Mail on Sunday can reveal. (Above, Harry and Meghan with bodyguards in New Zealand in 2018)

Lawyers acting for Harry, who stepped down from Royal duties two years ago, have written a 'pre-action protocol' letter to the Home Office, indicating they will seek a judicial review if continued security is not provided by the UK. (Pictured, the Sussexes with the Queen at Buckingham Palace in 2018)

Attorneys performing for Harry, who stepped down from Royal duties two years in the past, have written a ‘pre-action protocol’ letter to the Dwelling Workplace, indicating they’ll search a judicial assessment if continued safety just isn’t offered by the UK. (Pictured, the Sussexes with the Queen at Buckingham Palace in 2018)

Suggesting why Harry may have chosen now – two years after 'Megxit' – to launch his legal bid, the source added: 'When Harry came back last April for Prince Philip's funeral [above], he was given security. But when he came back in the summer, he wasn't'

Suggesting why Harry could have chosen now – two years after ‘Megxit’ – to launch his authorized bid, the supply added: ‘When Harry got here again final April for Prince Philip’s funeral [above], he was given safety. However when he got here again in the summertime, he wasn’t’

Forward of the funeral, Harry travelled to Britain together with his personal safety workforce, however was met on the tarmac at Heathrow by Scotland Yard safety officers.

It’s understood that was not the case when he returned to the UK for the revealing of a statue of Princess Diana at Kensington Palace together with his brother William in July. Following a 20-minute reception after the revealing, Harry left with bodyguards thought to have been offered at his personal expense.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have made no secret of their unhappiness on the elimination of their taxpayer-funded safety. 

The couple have been dwelling in Canada – guarded by publicly funded British UK and Canadian safety – when ‘Megxit’ was introduced in January 2020.

On the identical time, the safety part of their new web site – on which they detailed their notion of a ‘new working mannequin’ – described them as ‘internationally protected folks’. However the ‘working mannequin’ had not been agreed by the Queen and the part was swiftly eliminated.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have made no secret of their unhappiness at the removal of their taxpayer-funded security. The couple were living in Canada – guarded by publicly funded British UK and Canadian security – when 'Megxit' was announced in January 2020. (Above, Harry and Meghan in Manhattan in September 2021 after visiting the 9/11 memorial pools)

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have made no secret of their unhappiness on the elimination of their taxpayer-funded safety. The couple have been dwelling in Canada – guarded by publicly funded British UK and Canadian safety – when ‘Megxit’ was introduced in January 2020. (Above, Harry and Meghan in Manhattan in September 2021 after visiting the 9/11 memorial swimming pools)

Following crisis talks at Sandringham, it was eventually agreed that the Sussexes would no longer use their 'HRH' titles and Harry was stripped of his military honours. (Pictured, Harry and Meghan in New York City last year)

Following disaster talks at Sandringham, it was finally agreed that the Sussexes would not use their ‘HRH’ titles and Harry was stripped of his navy honours. (Pictured, Harry and Meghan in New York Metropolis final 12 months)

Following disaster talks at Sandringham, it was finally agreed that the Sussexes would not use their ‘HRH’ titles and Harry was stripped of his navy honours.

In the meantime, a ‘Royal and VIP Govt Committee’ comprising the Dwelling Secretary, the Metropolitan Police’s royalty safety command chief and palace officers determined that the couple’s 24-hour safety couldn’t proceed given they have been not working royals dwelling in Britain.

That call clearly rankled with Harry, who used the bombshell TV interview with US chatshow host Oprah Winfrey final March to specific his anger at it.

He stated: ‘The most important concern was that whereas we have been in Canada, in another person’s home, I then bought informed at quick discover safety was going to be eliminated… Their justification is a change in standing, of which I pushed again and stated, ‘Nicely, is there a change of menace or danger?’

‘And after many weeks of ready, finally I bought the affirmation that no, the danger and menace hasn’t modified however [it was] because of our change in standing, [by] which we might not be official working members of the Royal Household.’ He added: ‘My household actually lower me off financially and I needed to afford safety for us.’

The Queen

Prince Harry

The Queen is known to have been made conscious of her grandson’s motion, which is regarded as the primary time a member of the Royal Household has introduced a case in opposition to Her Majesty’s Authorities

Ahead of Prince Philip's funeral, Harry travelled to Britain with his private security team, but was met on the tarmac at Heathrow by Scotland Yard protection officers. It is understood that was not the case when he returned to the UK for the unveiling of a statue of Princess Diana at Kensington Palace with his brother William in July (above)

Forward of Prince Philip’s funeral, Harry travelled to Britain together with his personal safety workforce, however was met on the tarmac at Heathrow by Scotland Yard safety officers. It’s understood that was not the case when he returned to the UK for the revealing of a statue of Princess Diana at Kensington Palace together with his brother William in July (above)

Ms Winfrey stated the couple weren’t paid for the interview, however Harry had, by then, acquired a reported £500,000 price to present a keynote speech to J P Morgan bankers in Miami.

Earlier than transferring into their nine-bedroom, £10 million house in Montecito, California, they got using a mansion owned by leisure tycoon Tyler Perry, who additionally offered the couple with safety.

Meghan informed Ms Winfrey: ‘We wanted a home and he supplied safety as effectively, so it gave us respiration room to strive to determine what we have been going to do.’

Harry’s choice to instruct his legal professionals, Schillings, to threaten authorized motion in opposition to the Authorities may inflame tensions together with his household.

It additionally offers an additional headache for the Queen solely days after she stripped Prince Andrew of his navy honours and charity patronages after a US choose dominated {that a} declare of intercourse abuse made in opposition to him – and vehemently denied – would proceed.

Like Harry, Andrew will not use his ‘HRH’ title. The Queen’s second son may additionally lose his safety, estimated to price £2 million yearly. Princess Anne and Prince Edward obtain safety solely when they’re conducting royal duties.

Throughout a earlier assessment of safety spending in 2011, Andrew’s daughters, Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie – then fifth and sixth in line to the Throne – had their police safety eliminated on the grounds they have been non-working Royals.

Before moving into their nine-bedroom, £10 million home in Montecito, California, the Sussexes were given the use of a mansion (above) owned by entertainment tycoon Tyler Perry, who also provided the couple with security

Earlier than transferring into their nine-bedroom, £10 million house in Montecito, California, the Sussexes got using a mansion (above) owned by leisure tycoon Tyler Perry, who additionally offered the couple with safety

If Harry wins his case, any ‘treatment’ or answer could be on the discretion of the choose. 

The authorized battle may very well be costly, with the loser more likely to must pay the prices of the winner in addition to their very own. The Sussexes, nevertheless, have secured a string of profitable offers, together with a reported £18 million settlement with streaming large Spotify and a partnership with Netflix.

A Authorities spokesman stated final evening: ‘The UK Authorities’s protecting safety system is rigorous and proportionate. It’s our long-standing coverage to not present detailed data on these preparations. To take action may compromise their integrity and have an effect on people’ safety. It will additionally not be applicable to touch upon the element of any authorized proceedings.’

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been contacted for remark.

It also provides a further headache for the Queen only days after she stripped Prince Andrew of his military honours and charity patronages after a US judge ruled that a claim of sex abuse made against him – and vehemently denied – would proceed

It additionally offers an additional headache for the Queen solely days after she stripped Prince Andrew of his navy honours and charity patronages after a US choose dominated {that a} declare of intercourse abuse made in opposition to him – and vehemently denied – would proceed

Are fears for the protection of Archie and Lilibet behind calls for?

By KATE MANSEY for the Mail on Sunday

When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex spoke to Oprah Winfrey final March, certainly one of their sensational claims was that their son Archie wouldn’t be given police safety as a result of he was not made a prince.

‘Behind closed doorways we knew I used to be pregnant… And that was when [the family] have been saying they did not need him to be a prince or princess – and that he wasn’t going to obtain safety,’ Meghan claimed.

She added: ‘Look, as a result of if he is not going to be a prince, it is like, OK, effectively he must be protected, so we’re not saying do not make him a prince or a princess – no matter it will be – however in the event you’re saying the title is what is going on to have an effect on their safety, we have not created this monster machine round us when it comes to clickbait and tabloid fodder.

When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex spoke to Oprah Winfrey last March, one of their sensational claims was that their son Archie would not be given police protection because he was not made a prince. (Pictured: Archie, Meghan and Harry in Cape Town in 2019)

When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex spoke to Oprah Winfrey final March, certainly one of their sensational claims was that their son Archie wouldn’t be given police safety as a result of he was not made a prince. (Pictured: Archie, Meghan and Harry in Cape City in 2019)

Now, of course, the Sussexes have two children and Harry will be keen to ensure the protection of Archie, two, and Lilibet Diana, who turns one on the Queen's Jubilee celebration weekend in June. But a royal title would not necessarily guarantee 24-hour police protection paid for by the British taxpayer. (Above, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle revealed the first photo of their daughter Lilibet Diana, six months after she was born, in their family Christmas card)

Now, after all, the Sussexes have two youngsters and Harry will likely be eager to make sure the safety of Archie, two, and Lilibet Diana, who turns one on the Queen’s Jubilee celebration weekend in June. However a royal title wouldn’t essentially assure 24-hour police safety paid for by the British taxpayer. (Above, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle revealed the primary photograph of their daughter Lilibet Diana, six months after she was born, of their household Christmas card)

‘You have allowed that to occur, which implies our son must be protected. There was lots of worry surrounding it,’ Meghan stated.

‘I used to be very scared of getting to supply up our child, understanding that they weren’t going to be stored protected.’

Now, after all, the Sussexes have two youngsters and Harry will likely be eager to make sure the safety of Archie, two, and Lilibet Diana, who turns one on the Queen’s Jubilee celebration weekend in June. However a royal title wouldn’t essentially assure 24-hour police safety paid for by the British taxpayer.

Princess Anne, who final 12 months carried out 387 official engagements – the best variety of any Royal – has publicly funded police safety solely whereas she is on official duties. The identical applies to her brother Prince Edward. Probably the most senior members of the Royal Household and the Authorities do obtain computerized safety from Scotland Yard, however a joint authorities committee authorises safety for different people similar to former Prime Ministers and former Northern Eire secretaries.

Whereas Harry has stepped again from Royal duties, signed profitable offers and moved to the US, supporters would doubtless level out that his profession within the Armed Forces, together with two excursions of responsibility in Afghanistan, in addition to his standing as a member of the Windsor household, make him and his household potential targets for terrorists.

SARAH VINE: Prince Harry, in the event you nonetheless need safety for the household, get your mates at Netflix to shell out for it

By SARAH VINE for the Mail on Sunday 

Prince Harry does decide his moments, does not he? Simply in case the Queen had quickly forgotten in regards to the nightmare that he and the Duchess of Sussex have visited upon her in current months, right here he’s to remind her that, no matter different urgent points she may need on her plate, it is all about HIM.

What a whining, pathetic bore this man has grow to be.

What an entitled, tedious little ingrate.

Not content material with trashing his household, splashing his grievances everywhere in the world’s entrance pages and kicking his 95-year-old granny when she’s down, he is now demanding that she – and the British taxpayer – stump up for the privilege.

Prince Harry does pick his moments, doesn't he? Just in case the Queen had temporarily forgotten about the nightmare that he and the Duchess of Sussex have visited upon her in recent months, here he is to remind her that, whatever other pressing issues she might have on her plate, it's all about HIM, writes Sarah Vine

Prince Harry does decide his moments, does not he? Simply in case the Queen had quickly forgotten in regards to the nightmare that he and the Duchess of Sussex have visited upon her in current months, right here he’s to remind her that, no matter different urgent points she may need on her plate, it is all about HIM, writes Sarah Vine

Let’s be in little question: it was Harry and Meghan’s personal choice to go away behind their Royal trappings in quest of a special life in America. Theirs and theirs alone.

And whereas they could delude themselves that they have been compelled into exile by an ungrateful nation insufficiently appreciative of their gracious presence, the reality is that they actually did not must go.

They went as a result of it suited their objective, and since their ambitions exceeded what they noticed because the parochial, limiting confines of pricey outdated Blighty.

They went as a result of they’d satisfied themselves that they have been being poorly handled, when the truth is they’d each alternative to make successful of issues. They simply could not be bothered to strive.

Which is honest sufficient – it is their life in any case, their alternative. However personal it. As a substitute, they’ve spent the previous two years blaming everybody else.

When it was not different folks’s strategy in direction of them that prompted all their issues within the first place, it was their appalling angle and their willpower to see the slightest criticism as an act of aggression.

Anybody who handled them with something apart from complete sycophancy – even inside the ranks of their very own household and advisers – grew to become an enemy.

Fact is, all of us adored them each till they began performing like a pair of woke evangelists, lecturing the world about how folks ought to behave whereas demonstrating spectacular ranges of hypocrisy and conceitedness.

Hopping on personal jets when it suited them whereas happening about local weather change; luxuriating within the generosity of the British taxpayer and the trimmings of their Royal standing whereas refusing to play their half with something apart from resentment and rancour; abandoning their duties for the sake of a life with out duty (however with a newfound alternative to commerce on their titles and standing to safe profitable offers overseas for spilling the Royal beans).

They solid themselves as ‘victims’ at each flip, refusing to just accept their very own half on this tedious and unending drama.

Truth is, they misplaced their taxpayer-funded safety safety as a result of they selected to relinquish their Royal standing and transfer midway the world over to the sunny uplands of California.

Why ought to the British folks proceed to pay for 2 individuals who need nothing to do with Britain or our Royal Household?

If somebody quits their job for extra money and higher perks, then badmouths their earlier employer throughout city, they can not additionally demand they preserve their outdated firm bank card, can they?

And but that is basically what Harry is asking for. If you would like safety, Harry, get your new mates at Netflix to pay for it. I am positive they’re going to be very happy to stump up in trade for one more no holds barred moan-a-thon in regards to the depraved of us again house.

The truth that he’s selecting to embark on this plan of action in such an aggressive approach and thru authorized channels at a time of nice issue for the Queen is simply the final straw so far as I am involved.

Proof, if proof have been wanted, that Prince Harry actually has grow to be the type of fellow who would sue his personal grandmother for the sake of a fast buck.