Of course, people demand proof, and there is none that I know of that they actually did pay back the money for Frogmore.

There were plenty of articles at the time in the papers, broadsheets included and no-one refuted the claim. I'm sure some Royal source would have leaked it had not been paid if that was the case. Not sure what evidence there could be, they are hardly going to post the receipt

I'm not saying they didn't pay it back, they probably did, but when I mention something that was in the papers, broadsheets included, people mock and want proof.
I buy The Times and the Spectator, which you have to pay a subscription for online, whereas the Daily Mail etc are free online....so that is where I can copy and paste from. The reports and articles are practically the same. The delivery may vary, but the main facts of the reports are there.
I'm not paying subscriptions just because my detractors shout "It's the Daily Fail, all lies, lies lies!" I had a subscription for the Times for a while, and whenever I used it instead, that was all lies lies lies!, no evidence! as well. :hee:

Also, going back to the time of Diana and Fergie, people pooh - poohed what the papers were saying in report after report, in the fullness of time the majority of what they reported proved to be very accurate.

When many papers are reporting the same thing, like the Frogmore cottage repayment, it can't just be written off automatically as lies, whether its something you want to believe or it isn't.