Latest news with #WilliamSeymour
News.com.au
26-05-2025
- Business
- News.com.au
English lord responds to son's $177 million inheritance
An English lord has blocked his eldest son from taking over the family's £85 million ($A177 million) estate because of his 'lack of achievement'. The Earl of Yarmouth, William Seymour, was left out of the fortune after a fallout, The Sun reports. According to the BBC, the 31-year-old took his parents and three siblings to court over the estate, which included the 400-year-old family seat Ragley Hall, in Warwickshire. Lord Yarmouth asked for the two trust corporations to be removed as trustees and replaced with an independent one. Lord and Lady Hertford, along with Lord Yarmouth's siblings – Lady Gabriella Seymour, Lord Edward Seymour and Lady Antonia Seymour opposed the legal claim. The three settlements which consist of the estate, including farmland, residential properties and woodland, are valued at around £45 million ($A93 million). The court heard that while William held a 'very earnest belief' that the trustees failed in their duties in the way Ragley was run, it was unfounded. In his ruling, Judge James Brightwell said he accepted the 'damaged and fractured' relationship between Lord Yarmouth and his parents and siblings was 'poor'. The judge added the bad relationship between William and his parents wasn't enough to remove the trustees. Ragley estate, which is 6,500-acres, includes a 110-room mansion, farms, a sprawling woods, and hundreds of acres of parkland. It has been in the Seymour Family for about 400 years, and has connections to Jane Seymour, Henry VIII's third wife. The Earl of Yarmouth has been embroiled in the public spat with his family since 2018. The aristocrat complained that his parents had led him to believe he would take over the running of the estate when he turned 30. William also claimed his parents weren't happy he wanted to marry former Goldman Sachs banker Lady Yarmouth, Kelsey Wells. The court previously heard that William, who was worth £4 million at 21, had not been interested in the estate until he met his wife Kelsey. After their marriage, William began complaining about how the estate was being run and argued his wife was being shown 'disrespect' for not being invited to the trustee meeting. His father, Lord Hertford, told the court he had planned for his son to take over the estate but changed his mind – believing he was no longer 'appropriate' for the job. He said William and Kelsey marrying was not the 'main reason' for the decision, but rather his son's 'lack of achievement'. In evidence, he said: '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.' The judge ruled that Lord and Lady Hertford had obviously shown 'deep antagonism' towards their daughter-in-law. However, the judge said that the son's dispute as to the way Ragley is run was not well-founded. 'The fact that the claimant has a very earnest belief that the trustees have failed in their duties or should have acted differently, in an unspecified way, is no sufficient basis for a finding that they have so failed in their duties,' the judge added.
Daily Mail
24-05-2025
- Business
- Daily Mail
Countess of Yarmouth reveals she's worried about paying children's school fees after her aristocratic husband's parents disinherited him and cut him off from 345-year-old ancestral home
The wife of the Earl of Yarmouth, who has been disinherited from his aristocratic family's £85million estate, says she fears the couple will not be able to 'meet the cost' of their children's private school fees after losing a bitter legal battle. 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. However Lord Hertford, 66, said his decision to disinherit his son may have 'coincided with his marriage, but Kelsey is not the main reason.' He cited other factors including that he was 'disappointed at William's lack of achievement' and said he did not have the 'qualifications or experience' to take over the family's Ragley estate in Warwickshire. Lord Yarmouth launched a 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. But in a judgement handed down on Monday, Master James Brightwell dismissed his claim, ruling that the trustees had 'acted professionally throughout and are capable of continuing to do so.' It now means Lord Yarmouth has effectively been disinherited from the sprawling estate, including the 110-room Palladian stately mansion his parents call home. For her part, Lady Yarmouth has called the entire affair a 'tragedy'- not only financially, but also personally, as her husband and now also their children, Clement, five, and Jocelyn, three, having been excommunicated by the Hertfords. She has also clarified their high-profile legal battle, which has essentially aired the family's woes in public, was never about the inheritance, but simply a way to protect 'uncertainty' for their children, who are discretionary beneficiaries of the family trusts. Previously the couple had received around £7.45million in assets and income from the trusts - but Lady Yarmouth says they have now not received any money to pay for their children's school fees. 'We are trying to meet that cost ourselves,' she told The Times, pointing to her 'entrepreneurial' husband, who runs a business selling an award-winning elderflower liqueur called St Maur. 'One of the things that is of principal benefit to future generations, the future of the marquessate, the senior male line, is to help and support them with their education.' Throughout the court case, Lord Yarmouth was referred to as 'lazy' and an 'entitled toff', though his wife was keen to argue against such barbs. In contrast he was a 'doer', she said. He has been getting up at four o'clock in the morning to harvest the elderflowers, bottling the liquor and selling the product at markets and festivals. That said, there was no entirely escaping from their aristocratic background. The Countess said she acknowledged they are 'very privileged individuals', but was insistent her children should not be a part of the 'inter-generational dispute' that has struck the family. She added: 'We are trying to make better than what we have received and we are trying to improve on what we have received for the future.' In the wake of their legal defeat, the couple said they would be looking to foster reconciliation with the Hertfords, but the cracks between son and parents have been long established. Before their marriage, he 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,' according to evidence submitted by Lord Yarmouth to the High Court. The court heard that Lord Yarmouth had expected to inherit the family's Ragley estate in Warwickshire when he turned 30. By the age of just 21 he had already received more than £4.2million in land and property. 'William's behaviour started to change before his marriage,' the Marquess of Hertford 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.' In his judgment, Master James 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, Lord Yarmouth said in a statement afterwards that 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, Jane 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 since the 1960s when Lord Hertford's father made it his main residence. 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. Edward 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 liqueur 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?'
Times
23-05-2025
- Business
- Times
Countess of Yarmouth: Our disinheritance is a tragedy
Every morning this week, the Earl of Yarmouth, William Seymour, has risen from his bed in the early hours, pulled on his clothes and gone to work on his family farm. To his wife, the work ethic that drives the routine picking elder blossoms for their liqueur business stands in stark contrast to assumptions that have come to be made about her husband. Because in addition to being a businessman, the earl is the scion of one of Britain's grandest aristocratic families, whose £85 million ancestral estate centres on the 345-year-old Ragley Hall. 'There's this talk of entitlement and that William is a lazy, entitled toff,' the Countess of Yarmouth, Kelsey Seymour, said. 'Well, I can tell you he's getting up at four o'clock in
The Sun
20-05-2025
- Business
- The Sun
Dad cuts son out of £85MILLION inheritance over his ‘lack of achievement' after pair fell out
A LORD stopped his eldest son from taking over his £85million ancestral estate because of his "lack of achievement". The Earl of Yarmouth William Seymour - the eldest of three children - was left out of the fortune after a fallout. 4 He took High Court action against his family over the estate, which included the 400-year-old family seat Ragley Hall, in Warwickshire. The court heard that while he held a "very earnest belief" that the trustees failed in their duties in the way Ragley was run, it was unfounded. The judge said the bad relationship between William and his parents wasn't enough to remove the trustees. Ragley estate, which is 6,500-acres, includes a 110-room mansion, farms, a sprawling woods, and hundreds of acres of parkland. It has been in the Seymour Family for about 400 years, descendant from Jane Seymour, Henry VIII's third wife. The Earl of Yarmouth has been embroiled in the public spat with his family since 2018. The 31-year-old complained that his parents had led him to believe he would take over the running of the estate once he hit 30. William also claimed his parents weren't happy he wanted to marry former Goldman Sachs banker Lady Yarmouth, Kelsey Wells. The court previously heard that William, who was worth £4million at 21, had not been interested in the estate until he met his wife Kelsey. After their marriage, William began complaining about how the estate was being run and argued his wife was being shown "disrespect" for not being invited to the trustee meeting. His father, Lord Hertford, told the court he had planned for his son to take over the estate but changed his mind - believing he was no longer "appropriate" for the job. He said William and Kelsey marrying was not the "main reason" for the decision, but rather his son's "lack of achievement". In evidence, he said: "I am proud of the fact that he went to college but made a mistake at university and didn't graduate", the BBC reported. "William has not followed a profession or obtained qualifications or experience to take over the running of Ragley Hall." The judge ruled that the Lord and Lady Hertford had obviously shown "deep antagonism" towards their daughter-in-law. However, the judge said that the son's dispute as to the way Ragley is run was not well-founded. 4
BBC News
19-05-2025
- Business
- BBC News
Earl of Yarmouth loses £85m Ragley estate high court family row
The eldest son of an aristocratic family has lost a legal battle in which he was claiming he should have been given its £85m ancestral Earl of Yarmouth, William Seymour, took the High Court action against his parents, three siblings and two trust corporations over the running of parts of the Ragley legal claim related to three settlements which form part of the estate including the 400-year-old family seat, Ragley Hall in his ruling on Monday, Judge James Brightwell said he accepted the "damaged and fractured" relationship between Lord Yarmouth and his parents and siblings was "poor". Lord Yarmouth had asked for the two trust corporations to be removed as trustees and replaced with an independent and Lady Hertford, as well as Lord Yarmouth's siblings - Lady Gabriella Seymour, Lord Edward Seymour and Lady Antonia Seymour - all opposed the legal three settlements which form part of the estate, including farmland, residential properties and woodland, are valued at about £45m. In evidence for the hearing in London, Lord Yarmouth, 31, told the court his parents led him to believe that he would take over the running of the estate aged 30, and that several land appointments had been made to him when he was claimed his parents were "far from delighted" with his plans to marry Lady Yarmouth, Kelsey his evidence, Lord Hertford said he did plan for his son to take over the running of the estate but now did not consider him "appropriate".He added this decision "coincides with his marriage, but Kelsey is not the main reason", claiming that his son's behaviour "started to change" before the wedding."I am disappointed at William's lack of achievement," he added."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."Lord Yarmouth asked the judge to order the removal of two trust corporations, Ragley Trust Company Ltd and Seymour Trust Company Ltd, as co-trustees of the three the judge said that while it was "obvious" that Lord and Lady Hertford had shown "deep antagonism" to Lady Yarmouth and "created practical difficulties in the wedding arrangements", Lord Yarmouth was "keen to create a dispute about the way Ragley was run at a root and branch level".He also said he did not consider the claims to be "well-founded", and continued that he accepted evidence that the trustees "administer the trusts themselves, making decisions independently of Lord and Lady Hertford"."The fact that the claimant has a very earnest belief that the trustees have failed in their duties or should have acted differently, in an unspecified way, is no sufficient basis for a finding that they have so failed in their duties," the judge added. Follow BBC Coventry & Warwickshire on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.
