Earl of Yarmouth, 31, loses court fight which pitted him against his own family over £85million estate but says he is 'open to reconciliation' with his parents despite his 'trauma' from feud
The Earl of Yarmouth has lost a bitter court fight which pitted him against his aristocratic family over the running of their £85million estate.
William Seymour, 31, has been involved in a messy spat with his parents, the Marquess and Marchioness of Hertford, since 2018, when they objected to his wedding to Kelsey Wells – now Lady Yarmouth – a former director at Goldman Sachs.
The family displayed such 'deep antagonism' towards Lady Yarmouth, 39, that on their wedding day Lord Hertford told his son that 'you can still call it off and we'll send everyone home, just say no,' Lord Yarmouth claimed in evidence to the High Court.
The court heard that Lord Yarmouth expected to inherit the family's Ragley estate in Warwickshire, including the 110-room Palladian stately mansion his parents call home, when he turned 30.
By the age of just 21 he had already received more than £4.2million in land and property.
However Lord Hertford, 66, decided to disinherit his son as their animosity deepened, saying this decision 'coincided with his marriage, but Kelsey is not the main reason.'
'William's behaviour started to change before his marriage,' he said in a witness statement.
'William asked me to confirm that I would hand over Ragley Hall to him on turning 30. It was like he had promised Kelsey that they would be moving into Ragley Hall, he was persistent.
'I am disappointed at William's lack of achievement. I am proud of the fact that he went to college but made a mistake at university and didn't graduate. William has not followed a profession or obtained qualifications or experience to take over the running of Ragley Hall.'
He added: 'The tipping point in my deliberations of passing the running of Ragley Hall to William at age 30 was a letter received from him to my wife, Lady Hertford dated 25 July 2018 questioning my mental ability to continue running Ragley Hall.
'I do not consider William to be an appropriate person to take over the running of Ragley Hall. He has not done anything to make me change my mind.'
Lord Yarmouth then launched legal action in an attempt to remove the trustees in charge of the running of the estate – including a cousin of his father and a long-standing family friend – who he felt were on the side of his parents and had 'closed ranks' against him.
To assist his case, he even surreptitiously recorded meetings with his father, trustees and other relatives and claimed he was planning a 'hostile takeover.'
But in a judgement handed down today, Master James Brightwell dismissed his claim, ruling that the trustees had 'acted professionally throughout and are capable of continuing to do so.'
Master Brightwell added that, in recording meetings, Lord Yarmouth was 'looking for ammunition for a dispute' and questioning his father's mental ability was a 'casus belli' – an act or situation provoking or justifying war.
Despite losing the court case and having his family woes aired in public, in a statement released following the court's verdict today, Lord Yarmouth said he was 'disappointed' but also 'open to reconciliation' with his parents.
'My purpose has been to seek to ensure the protection of my family's interests in the trusts, and in particular the welfare of my children as beneficiaries,' he said.
'I came to the court with the sincere hope of finding a fair and lasting resolution to a fraught situation.
'As much as it is painful for both sides, my wife Kelsey and I remain open to reconciliation with my parents. Privately we have made this clear to Lord and Lady Hertford.'
He had previously told the court how the family feud had left him needing 'professional help and counselling to deal with trauma as a consequence'.
The family can trace its roots back to Henry VIII's third wife, Jayne Seymour. Ragley Hall, in Alcester, was built in the 1680s and sits within 450 acres of landscaped gardens, 4,500 acres of farmland and 1,000 acres of woodland.
It has been occupied permanently by the Marquess and Marchioness of Hertford when Lord Hertford's father moved there in the 1960s.
The court heard it was previously the intention of Lord Hertford to allow Lord Yarmouth, his eldest son, to inherit the estate when he turned 30. However, from the time of his marriage to Lady Yarmouth, relations deteriorated to the extent that Lord Yarmouth is also now estranged from his three siblings, who also opposed his court battle to remove the trustees.
Lord and Lady Hertford have also never met their young grandsons, Clement, five, and three-year-old Jocelyn.
As part of his claim, Lord Yarmouth claimed that when he sought a more central role to the running of the estate in 2018, one employee suggested that he should start by 'cleaning the lavatories.'
The court heard that Earl Yarmouth had also fallen out with his younger brother, Lord Edward Seymour.
He said: 'Our relationship started to go downhill however when William went to Cirencester Royal Agricultural University as William met some individuals who brought out the worst in him – William became pompous and showed signs of entitlement. Flaws that have been further exacerbated since his marriage to Kelsey.'
The family feud goes further. After being invited to Lord Yarmouth's wedding, his aunt, Lady Carolyn, the Marquess' sister, replied calling him: 'Little Lord Fauntleroy '.
The letter was signed off: 'You pompous a**/t**/p***k – take your pick… Your ever-so loving aunt'.
Lord Yarmouth now runs a business selling an award-winning elderflower liqeur called St Maur.
Responding to claims that he was an entitled 'toff', in an interview with The Telegraph in March, Lord Yarmouth said: 'If I am such a useless grifter then how have we made what is considered to be the world's best floral liqueur?'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
12 minutes ago
- The Sun
Labour put Red Arrows' future at risk by failing to replace ageing Hawk jets, slams Shadow Defence Secretary
LABOUR were accused of putting the Red Arrows future at risk last night by failing to replace their ageing Hawk jets. Shadow Defence Secretary James Cartlidge slammed the government for 'dithering' after The Sun revealed the display team is running out of Hawk T1s. 6 6 6 He said: 'The Sun's revelations on Red Arrow availability show why Labour needs to stop dithering and actually get on with ordering a new RAF training jet. He added: 'They should commit to buying British so that renewal of the Red Arrows supports jobs and investment across the country.' Top Brass admitted the Red Arrows may be forced to cancel air shows to reduce the wear and tear on their surviving aircraft. The Hawk T1s entered service 50 years ago and the factory that made spare parts has closed. Ground crews have been forced to cannibalise parts from old planes to keep the best ones running. RAF sources denied industry claims the fleet could plummet to six working aircraft by 2028. They insisted the Red Arrows could keep 11 aircraft in service until 2030 by scrounging parts from older aircraft. But with a quarter of the fleet in maintenance at any one time, the display team would be unable to fly their trademark Diamond Nine formation. An industry source said the RAF's projections were 'wildly optimistic'. Labour's Strategic Defence Review demanded RAF replace its fleet of Hawk jets as soon as possible. A defence source close to John Healey said: 'We've been clear that we will deliver on all the SDR recommendations, a replacement jet worthy of our iconic Reds is no different.' Incredible moment Red Arrows jets soar over Buckingham Palace in stunning footage captured from inside the cockpit The only British contender is a concept jet known as the Aeralise Fast Jet Trainer. Critics claim Aeralis is Qatari owned and yet to make a prototype. An RAF spokesperson said: 'The Red Arrows will continue to use the Hawk to perform displays and flypasts until their out of service date and have sufficient aircraft in the fleet to do so. 'We continue to work closely with industry partners to ensure an appropriate number of aircraft will be available.' 6 6 6
The Sun
12 minutes ago
- The Sun
Buy-now-pay-later Reeves is bribing voters with baubles as Labour's debt clock racks up and up
GOODBYE the Iron Chancellor, hello the Klarna Chancellor. Rachel Reeves' spending splurge yesterday may have some eye-catching purchases. But it's buy now, pay later as Labour racked up the debt even further. 3 You could hear Nigel Farage breathing down the neck of her Spending Review that saw the Treasury shovel billions out of the door on the never never. Clearly designed to see cranes in the sky and spades in the (electoral battle) ground, Reeves stuck another £113billion on the borrowing tab to try to see off the threat of Reform in the next crucial three years ahead of the election. There was £39billion for affordable homes and another £14billion for the first nuclear power station to be built in a generation. The £7billion prison-building project should be welcomed, as long as the judges actually fill them with violent thugs rather than online mums publishing stupid tweets. Bribe and cajole But voters will be wary of the £16billion in transport upgrades outside of the South East — what you might call levelling up — having heard these promises before, only to see them paused, scrapped and delayed again and again. And let's hope none of the above projects over-run on their budget — like pretty much every other major government infrastructure initiative has in the past 40 years. I couldn't help thinking Reeves' speech yesterday was the most she had ever sounded like Gordon Brown, torturing a dreary mantra that these were 'Labour choices' as she sought to bribe and cajole voters with baubles while the debt clock racked up and up. But we all know what happened to Brown when the music stopped . . . While the bond markets were steady last night after Donald Trump struck a trade deal with China, these things can go south very quickly, so it's far from clear if this spending gamble will pay off for Reeves. As former Cabinet Secretary Simon Case told The Sun this week: 'The nation's credit card is maxed out.' Top 5 takeaways from Spending review He warned: 'Just like when you're at home and you've got your credit card or your mortgage, you have to pay for that debt. 'So the debt interest that we're paying on the nation's credit card, if you actually put it out like it was a government department, it would be one of the biggest government departments by spending. 'It's taking up huge amounts of our money.' The Institute for Fiscal Studies put the extra borrowing Reeves has undertaken since taking over at No11 at £140billion, with more than £105billion of taxpayers' cash alone this year going on interest payments. To tackle this, Case directly urged Reeves this week to 'put the squeeze' on public spending or face a debt crisis and a lack of confidence in the UK's financial system with horrific effects. 3 So were there any cuts, or restraint of any real note yesterday? Of course there was the obligatory three per cent rise in NHS spending over the next three years as more pound notes poured into that seemingly indeterminable black hole. While NHS chiefs were crowing yesterday that they had 'done well' out of the settlement, they were already pumping out mood music that it might not be enough. Yet by 2029, the NHS annual budget will be just short of a quarter of a trillion pounds a year at £226billion. When will it ever be enough? And where are the promised reforms to the system that would rid us of this endless gimme, gimme, gimme cycle? Also, £9billon in efficiency savings for the NHS were proposed yesterday, with scarce details on the how, but already experts are pouring cold water on even that small sum being hit. Labour promised to get a grip on the NHS, and warned that more money would not be the answer. Another election promise that has turned to dust. As has Labour's pledge to end the use of migrant hotels within 12 months of taking power. That has now been downgraded to 'by the end of this Parliament' — at a cost of nearly £5billion until then. Smoke and mirrors Even by 2029, the Government will still be spending more than £2billion a year accommodating visitors, just not in hotels. So behind the smoke and mirrors of Reeves' speech to MPs, that isn't really a cut. And the continued costs of the heaving asylum bill dwarfs any of the departmental savings unveiled yesterday. Reeves was keen to stress no return to the days of austerity, and her tinkering on Whitehall budgets was about the only part of her speech yesterday that matched her rhetoric. The £1.5billion to be shaved off total departmental spending in the next three years pales in comparison to her extra spending elsewhere. Just over £14billion being spent this year, down to £12.6billion in three years' time. Hardly putting on the squeeze. GDP at 2.7trillion . . . Let's hope the Chancellor doesn't need a major rainy day fund anytime soon, or she really will be the new Gordon Brown.
Daily Mail
13 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
The six claims from Rachel Reeves that would never pass the test on a lie detector: ALEX BRUMMER
Rachel Reeves 's spending review was one of the most disingenuous statements I can remember in my long career as a financial journalist. In this deeply misleading review, the Chancellor used smoke and mirrors to disguise several key facts. A number of her claims would frankly fail a polygraph test. 1. She 'stabilised' the economy
