Like all disputes within the House of Windsor, it didn't take long before it spilled onto the pages of the British tabloids.
In early August, The Sun newspaper claimed King Charles III was considering stripping his disgraced brother Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, of his security detail.
Until 2022, Andrew was guarded by armed police, but he lost the right to taxpayer-funded security — along with his status as a working royal — after settling a sexual abuse case.
Since then, Charles has used his own money to fund private security guards to protect his brother, at a rumoured cost of $5.8 million a year
So why did this stoush about security spill into the tabloids?
It all appears to be part of a bigger, longer-running battle known as the "siege of Royal Lodge".
"What other reason could there be to take his security away?" an unnamed "palace insider" told The Sun.
"It isn't a secret that the king wants him out."
For years, the brothers have reportedly been at odds over a sweetheart deal cut between Andrew and his late mother, Queen Elizabeth II, to give the Duke of York lifelong possession of a grand mansion on the grounds of Windsor Castle.
Andrew and his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson, with whom he remains close friends, have lived at the Royal Lodge for 20 years.
But with Elizabeth no longer around to protect her alleged "favourite son", and Charles trying to navigate his brother's scandalous standing with the British public, Andrew's camp says he fears eviction.
"The last thing Andrew has left now is his status as a member of the royal family. Everything else, he's lost. And so he's hanging on desperately to this," royal biographer Andrew Lownie, who is writing a book on the duke, told the ABC.
"Charles can see it doesn't look good. I mean, Andrew must be one of the most unpopular figures in Britain.
"There's, I think, some resentment because of the embarrassment that he's brought to the monarchy from his behaviour and the behaviour of his wife."
And while a combination of tabloid pressure and negotiation appears to have saved Andrew and Sarah from eviction for now, the siege of the Royal Lodge is far from over.
Andrew's sweetheart deal was meant to last him for life
Prince Andrew had his eye on the Royal Lodge long before he moved in.
The 30-room mansion, which features a gardener's cottage, seven bedrooms and a so-called "gothic saloon", has long been a favourite among the royal family's collection of homes.
But on paper, it does not belong to the Windsors.
Instead, the lodge is part of the Crown Estate, a collection of real estate and land worth $27 billion.
Unlike Balmoral Castle in Scotland, which is Charles's private property, the Crown Estate's assets are overseen by an independent body.
The Queen Mother lived in the Royal Lodge rent free for five decades, under a so-called "grace and favour" arrangement with her daughter.
When she died in 2002, Prince Andrew told his mother and the Crown Estate that he would love to move in.
"He has this deal, which is unbelievable considering London rent … Queen Elizabeth gave him a 75-year lease on the property for £250 ($487) a week," UK royal commentator Afua Hagan told the ABC.
"He was allowed to continue living in the property for that price whilst essential repair works were being carried out."
There is one condition on this lease agreement.
Andrew is expected to pay for all the upkeep of the mansion, which is more than three centuries old, for as long as he lives there.
It was estimated that the property needed $13 million in renovations, but Prince Andrew told the Crown Estate he needed to spend more than this to get the house up to scratch.
But everything changed for Andrew in 2019, when convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein died by suicide in a New York prison cell.
His death put his long-running friendship with Andrew back in the spotlight and, after a calamitous interview on the BBC in which the Duke of York failed to express any sympathy for Epstein's victims, he stepped back as a working royal.
And then in 2022, he settled a civil suit brought by survivor Virginia Giuffre, who claimed she was trafficked by Epstein to the prince.
While Andrew maintains his innocence, within hours of the settlement being reached, Queen Elizabeth II had stripped him of his military affiliations and royal patronages.
With all the trappings of his old life gone, the Royal Lodge took on greater meaning to Andrew, according to commentators.
But when Charles acceded the throne later that year, he began making moves to push his brother out of the stately home.
"He doesn't need all that space, and also the optics are absolutely terrible that someone who stepped back as a working royal in disgrace is in this huge grace-and-favour property," Ms Hagan said.
"The king has offered Frogmore Cottage to Andrew, but Andrew has seen that as a demotion and says, no, he will not move there, and so he is sort of digging his heels in to stay in this 30-million-pound home."
The rumoured plan to put Andrew in Harry and Meghan's house
To understand how the siege of Royal Lodge ended up in the tabloids, we must first understand the relationship between the British press and the palace.
Commentators say that when family members become locked in disputes, the royals themselves — or their staff — use the tabloids to exert pressure on each other by trying to sway public opinion in their favour.
"Household A will go to the press and say, 'Let's have bad headlines about household B to make us look better,' and then Household B will do the same thing — go to the press and say the same thing about household A," Ms Hagan explained.
"It's all about trying to make whichever household look the best — like they are the most popular — because it is a massive popularity contest, really, being in the royal family. They always love to be on top."
Biographer Andrew Lownie says the details of this latest dispute over Andrew's security detail and efforts to move him into Frogmore Cottage have clearly been leaked by palace insiders, though it is unclear who is behind it.
"Watching the royal family is a bit like watching the Kremlin," he said. "They give little faint gestures and you have to work it out from that. But it's clear that there has been leaking by the principals.
"We've seen details of the lease being revealed. Now, the only people who could reveal that are people very close to Andrew … but I'm not convinced that this is all coming from Charles at the moment. I think there's something else at play here."
Whether the leaks have been sanctioned by a member of the royal family or not, various sources described by tabloids as "palace insiders" and "Andrew's friends" have spoken of the prince's determination to never end up at Frogmore Cottage.
The house, also on the grounds of Windsor Castle, used to be home to Prince Harry and his wife Meghan, and they repaid $4.7 million in renovation costs when they stepped back as working royals to pursue a new life in California.
The couple said they left the UK due to what they described as racist bullying by the British tabloids and the palace's lack of support in shielding them from it.
"He is not going to ... move into Harry and Meghan's old yoga studio," a source described as a "very old friend" told the Daily Beast.
"What would he actually do all day? Write his memoirs?" another friend added.
Daily Mail reporter Richard Eden also appeared to put pressure on Charles to back off when he wrote a piece imploring the king to focus his retaliation on his son and daughter-in-law instead.
"My advice to His Majesty is: stump up the security bill for Royal Lodge without complaint and let Andrew stay," Eden wrote earlier this month.
"Rather than get bogged down in this particular dispute, the king ought to turn his sights on Harry and Meghan."
With the tabloids turning and the family's annual Balmoral holiday looming, Charles appears to have cut a hasty deal with Andrew that allows his brother to stay at the home — for now.
But the siege of Royal Lodge and the complex relationship between the king and his brother is far from resolved.
On Friday, UK media reported Prince Harry and Prince William had attended the funeral service of their mother's brother-in-law, Robert Fellowes, in Norfolk.
The pair have not been seen in Britain together since last year.
'It's never been a great relationship'
For centuries, the crown has had a way of coming between the heir and the spare. Charles and Andrew have proven to be no different.
"It's never been a great relationship," said.
"There's jealousy because Charles basically had to toe the line … Andrew has basically been allowed to do what he wants.
"He (Andrew) was the good-looking one who picked up all the girls and had the easy relationship with their mum. So there's no love lost between them."
Mr Lownie said the Queen and Andrew enjoyed a close bond and, as a result, she protected him as much as possible as his life was swallowed by scandal.
"He had his mother around his little finger and every time there was a problem he just ran to her, so the dynamics have changed. Charles now calls the shots and, you know, I think it's payback time," he said.
Charles's son and heir, Prince William, who will one day inherit the throne and all the family complications that come with it, is also keen to keep Andrew in the shadows, according to Ms Hagan.
"There's an element of Prince William trying to put pressure on Andrew to step back, to stay out of sight, because the optics are particularly awful," she said.
But for now, at least, Andrew and Sarah Ferguson don't have to downsize.
A "well-placed source" told Sky News this week that Andrew had negotiated for his brother to pay for a "budget-friendly mobile security team" and install an alarm system in the Royal Lodge.
The 11th-hour deal comes as the Windsors — including Andrew and Sarah —head north to Balmoral Castle to spend the summer together.
But in a family with this much real estate, Mr Lowrie says Charles should be able to avoid any awkward confrontations with his brother.
"It's a big place, Balmoral," he said.
"They have lots of cottages and may not necessarily see that much of each other. So they're not going to be necessarily even seeing each other at the breakfast table."
Even though Andrew has held on this time, Ms Hagan does not believe the siege of Royal Lodge is over.
"We know that [Andrew has] denied all charges, but they're certainly salacious at best," she said.
"So I think keeping his security and for him to still have this grace-and-favour property doesn't really fit well when Harry and Meghan just decided to step back as working royals because they wanted to do other things.
"If Harry and Meghan stepped back as working royals and they no longer have royal properties or security, then the same things should not be afforded to Prince Andrew."
