When Netflix unveiled the trailer for its holiday special, “With Love, Meghan,” the streaming service likely anticipated that viewers would be eager to see the Duchess of Sussex share her exclusive tips on crafting California-inspired Christmas decor or how to enhance a turkey with dried flowers.

However, what truly captured attention wasn’t the festive advice but rather a brief view of a green dress worn by Meghan, which became the center of conversation.

Observant fans quickly recognized the one-shoulder gown as the £1,300 creation that Meghan had previously donned for a magazine photoshoot three years prior. This was the same dress she wore when photographed for Variety under the headline “The Meghan Moment.”

The reappearance of the Galvan ‘Ushuaia’ dress has sparked rumors that Meghan might have taken the dress from the shoot without permission, an accusation firmly denied by her representatives.

“The suggestion that any items were removed without the complete knowledge and consent of the on-set stylists or their teams is not only entirely false but also highly defamatory,” Meghan’s spokesperson told the Daily Mail.

“Any items retained were done so transparently and in line with contractual agreements.”

A source claimed it was usual for famous figures to retain items from photoshoots, in part to prevent potential re-sale or unauthorised auction. The source pointed out that clothing worn by members of the Royal Family and others had been targeted for re-sale in the past.

A stylist who has worked with the Royal Family told Tom Sykes’s The Royalist Substack: ‘It’s pretty clear she just wanted the dress and kept it. I’m sure the designer agreed. How could they not?

‘What’s interesting is that she doesn’t say she paid for it. From that, I think we can assume she didn’t. That’s the defence [Princess] Catherine always has: everything is paid for.’

Meghan was not allowed to accept any clothing free of charge when she was still a working royal. That was – and is – standard practice. Protocol does, however, allow working royals to receive clothes on loan provided they are later returned.

Vanity Fair journalist Vanessa Grigoriadis claimed on Andrew Gold’s Heretics podcast last year that Meghan took ‘a lot of stuff’ after stepping down as working royal, having ‘worn it in a very high-profile photoshoot’.

She said: ‘What’s shocking about hearing these kinds of alleged stories is that somebody who is living in a $15million-plus mansion in Montecito, who’s just had $100million deals, would care enough to take home some jewellery and clothes she can clearly afford [from a photoshoot].’

The claims will sting the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who were famously described by Spotify executive Bill Simmons as a ‘pair of f***ing grifters’ after their $20million multi-year deal to make podcasts with the audio streaming giant came to an end in 2023. The couple had made just 12 episodes.

Respected biographer Tom Bower has described the Duke and Duchess of Sussex as a pair of ‘scroungers’ who are ‘constantly looking for freebies’.

Vanity Fair journalist Vanessa Grigoriadis claimed on Andrew Gold’s Heretics podcast last year that Meghan took ‘a lot of stuff’ after stepping down as a working royal

Meghan wearing the £1,300 dress for her magazine photoshoot three years ago

Variety’s cover featuring the Duchess of Sussex, with the headline: ‘The Meghan Moment’

The author, who has written deeply researched books about Meghan and Harry – his other subjects have included F1 mogul Bernie Ecclestone and the Beckhams – repeated an ‘extraordinary’ story he’d heard about how the duke and duchess attempted to obtain a free holiday at a beachside mansion.

‘They are scroungers, the Sussexes,’ claimed Bower. ‘I heard this particular story, which is that Harry and Meghan were invited to [a] sun-kissed place by the beach. They were staying for a couple of days and arrived in the host’s private jet, as usual…

‘They heard that someone else who was there was quite an interesting person and, also, had a beautiful house by a beach and Meghan went up to her and said: “Let’s talk, let’s become friends”.’

Speaking on GB News, Bower continued: ‘The following day, after they were taken back home on the host’s private jet, Harry called this particular woman and said: “Is there a chance that we could borrow your house? Meghan wonders whether we could have it.”

‘The woman was a bit puzzled by this, but said in the end, “Okay”.

‘The following day Harry calls again and says, “Meghan also asks: can we get there in your private jet?” And that is exactly what the grift is all about, it’s about scrounging.

‘It’s about Harry and Meghan constantly looking for freebies, whether it’s jets, houses, meals, whatever, and that is in the end what drove Spotify, and also Netflix, mad.’

What’s indisputable is that the Sussexes’ super-rich friends do help to provide an extraordinary lifestyle for them.

Who could fail to be impressed by the grand New York City brownstone owned by ‘Cosmetic Queen’ Victoria Jackson, where Meghan recently conducted an interview with a journalist from Harper’s Bazaar magazine.

‘When I enter,’ the interviewer wrote, ‘the house manager announces, “Meghan, Duchess of Sussex”, even though we appear to be the only other two people in the house.’

The pomposity, I must admit, made me laugh out loud.

A spokesman for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex declined to comment on Bower’s claims.