Thursday, October 30, 2025 - The former cleaner of the late multimillionaire and “car boot king” Richard Scott has won a fight in court against his son over who stands to inherit his £43m fortune.
Tycoon and father-of-19 Richard married his former cleaner
Jennifer Scott, 28 years his junior, in 2016 after the passing of his first
wife. 
He then wrote his eldest and "favourite" son Adam Scott out of
his will, denying him a share of the fortune he had made running the UK's
second biggest boot fair from his "vast" Cheshire farm -
where ITV's 'Car Boot Challenge' was filmed. 
Jennifer was left to inherit his estate and farmland, which she said could
now be worth up to £43m when Richard di£d aged 81 in 2018. 
However, earlier this year, Adam, 62, sued his step-mum, 60, as executor
of his dad's estate, claiming his father was not in his right mind when he
signed his two final wills. 
Adam told how he had given up everything to commit to "a life of hard
and unrelenting physical work" on his dad’s promise that one day the
“golden boy” would inherit the farm after his de@th. 
However, Jennifer’s lawyers argued Richard had known exactly what he was doing when he disinherited Adam after their relationship "completely broke down" when he tried to get his dad sectioned.
They also said he had no claim on the basis of alleged promises and
pointed out that he had already been handed land and property worth more than
£10m before Richard's de@th. 
On Wednesday, Oct. 29, Mr Justice Richards ruled in favour of widow
Jennifer following a trial in July, dismissing both strands of Adam's claim and
leaving her in charge of the massive multimillion-pound estate. 
He said that whilst he accepted Mr Scott had been suffering from a
degenerative brain condition when he wrote former favourite Adam out of his
wills in 2016, the decision had been “the product of a personality type that
disliked being thwarted" rather than "one that involved his normal
human instincts and affections being perverted by his mental
disease". 
He also said that although his dad had promised Adam the whole of his land,
Adam had known that his dad intended to go back on his word since 2003, but had
continued to work on the farm, and in any case had suffered no detriment. 
During the trial, the court heard that "mercurial character" Richard was "a ruthless, single-minded and highly successful businessman who built up a valuable property empire" before switching to running giant and lucrative car boot sales
He fathered 19 children, lawyers for Jennifer told the court, six with his
first wife, plus six illegitimate children during that relationship, followed
by another seven with Jennifer, who was working as his cleaner when the pair
first got together in 1994. 
Richard and Jennifer eventually married in 2016, just two years before his
de@th in a controversial marriage disrupted by Adam trying to prevent the
wedding going ahead, claiming his dad didn't have the mental capacity to
marry. 
"It is common ground that on 22 April 2016 Adam attended the registry
office and alleged that Richard lacked capacity to marry," Alex Troup KC,
for Jennifer, told Mr Justice Richards. "That led to Richard being
interviewed by four registrars and a lawyer from the local council, all of whom
were satisfied that he did have capacity to marry. The wedding therefore went
ahead." 
The court heard that at the time of his de@th from cancer, Richard owned
"a huge quantity of land" around Chelford, Cheshire, which has been
officially valued for probate at around £7m, but which Jennifer said was worth
£43m based on offers she has received and development potential. 
Adam's lawyers said he spent more than
40 years helping his dad run the "vast, sprawling" farm and managing
the car boot sales he held on part of it, and had been in line to inherit it on
the basis that he would pay the probate value of the land, with that cash then
to be split amongst his many siblings.
But in 2016, just months after his
second marriage, Richard signed the two wills which disinherited Adam, and left
Jennifer in control of his wealth, as executor and a major beneficiary.
Jennifer's two sons, Gordon and
William Redgrave-Scott, and Adam's sister Rebecca Horley were also made
beneficiaries of the last wills. 
Adam challenged the validity of the
two final wills on the basis that his dad lacked mental capacity at the time
they were made and also brought an alternative claim under the law of
proprietary estoppel - a legal remedy that can be used when a landowner has
promised property will be transferred to someone else at a later date, only to
later go back on the promise. 
Constance McDonnell KC, for Adam, told
the judge: "At the heart of this case is a relationship between a father
and a son, their shared devotion to the family farm in Cheshire, and a
recognition by the father of his son’s willingness to commit to a life of hard
and unrelenting physical work.” 
Mr McDonnell said Adam should be
granted his inheritance under the terms of a 1995 will which promised the land
to him and said he was in no state to amend the will in 2016, with his dementia
having “eroded his ability to make decisions and to have insight,” with
Jennifer left “translating” his communications with others. 
However Mr Troup said Richard had good
reason to cut his son out of his will including a visit by police and medics to
the farm to consider sectioning him in 2013, which was said to have been
prompted by his son. 
He continued: "In July 2015, Adam
alleged to social services that Richard was beating Jennifer and the
children," he continued. 
"That led to an investigation by
social services, which was eventually closed...Richard was angry with Adam for
reporting him to social services and their relationship deteriorated as a
result." 
However Mr Justice Richards ruled that
Richard’s decisions to change the will was made not as a result of dementia,
“rather, they were the product of a personality type that disliked being
thwarted and engaged in careful measurement of how much his family members
'deserved' by reference to whether they had sought to thwart him or not.” 
He added: “his decision not to make
any significant provision for Adam cannot be explained as one that involved his
normal human instincts and affections being perverted by his mental
disease."



 
 
 
 
 
0 Comments