Earl locked in row with family over £85m estate

An aristocratic family is locked in a court battle, over a claim from the eldest son that he should have been given its £85m ancestral estate.

The High Court in London has heard that William Seymour, the Earl of Yarmouth, has been involved in a feud with his parents, the Marquess and Marchioness of Hertford, since his marriage in 2018.

A judge heard that Lord Yarmouth, 32, had expected to take over the 400-year-old family seat, Ragley Hall in Warwickshire, as his parents' oldest son, when he turned 30.

However, his father, Lord Hertford, said that in the run-up to and after his wedding, their relationship "deteriorated very sharply".

The earl and his wife Kelsey Wells have been locked in a court battle with his parents, who are backed by his three siblings, Lady Gabriella Seymour, 32, Lord Edward Seymour, 30, and Lady Antonia Seymour.

During the hearing, the judge, Master James Brightwell, was told that the relationship breakdown came after the Earl asked his father to hand over Ragley Hall to him when he turned 30 in 2023.

He also sent what his parents say were "hostile and inflammatory" emails to his mother, Beatriz, 64, "questioning [his father's] mental capacity," which they say caused "enormous upset and anger".

However, the earl and his wife, Kelsey Wells, said they were kicked out of their cottage home on the Ragley Estate with just a few days' notice and that clashes had taken place with trustees over the release of money for their two children's private school fees.

He said that the "trauma" of having his expectations dashed that he would take over the estate at 30 had "upended" his life, and he had needed "professional help and counselling to deal with trauma as a consequence."

But lawyers for his parents said the Earl of Yarmouth had behaved in an "unreasonable and vindictive" manner, and want the trusts left undisturbed.

Those running the family trusts - the Ragley Trust Company Ltd and Seymour Trust Company Ltd - deny bias.

Tim Sherwin - barrister for the two family trusts - claimed William had sparked conflict with his father by raising the topic of his succession as the oldest son and heir.

"Harry's [Lord Hertford's] account is that William asked him to confirm that Harry would hand over Ragley Hall to William when William turned 30, ie in late 2023," explained Mr Sherwin.

"Harry says he was disappointed with William's lack of achievements, and that the tipping point in their falling out was a letter from William sent on 25 July 2018 to (Lady Hertford) questioning Harry's mental capacity."

The earl had attended Cirencester Agricultural College, although he "dropped out after a year," said the barrister, and "he has not since obtained any professional or other qualifications."

But William says the problems were caused between him and his parents after they appeared to stage a shock "volte face" by dashing his hope and expectation that he would take over the estate while still a young man.

He had been rocked to receive an email from his Brazilian-born mother in March 2018, in which she told him: "As you know, darling, there are no funds available for supporting two generations at the same time and you should prepare for that.

"There are no obligations as to when or what is handed over. Ragley was passed to your father when he was 33 because your grandfather, then 61, saw fit.

"Nowadays, retirement happens later and people live longer. Our concern is you don't seem to be taking it all in; as if you were somehow expecting Ragley to fit within your needs."

The court heard William claimed he had never been given an explanation and that, as a result, his "position, circumstances, and needs had been changed profoundly in 2018."

His barrister, Paul Burton, said the trustees had contributed to family strife and misdirected the estate, telling the court: "I can't say that the trustees did this or that and so caused the family breakdown - I can say that the trustees are a problem and have exacerbated it and fuelled it."

"This is not a family dispute," he said.

"This is a claim against the trustees for their removal.

"That the relationship of trust and confidence between the claimant and the trustees has irretrievably broken down is beyond argument.

"There is no prospect of these outstanding matters being resolved while the trustees are in office."

Master Brightwell has now finished hearing the case and will give his ruling at a later date.

Follow BBC Coventry & Warwickshire on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.