70s music star sparks family war over £1m inheritance as wife CUT from will

The family of a music star from the 1970s is locked in a legal battle after he controversially cut his ex-wife from his will, despite her claims they had an agreement

A 70s music star's family are locked in a battle for his £1million inheritance after he made a controversial call in his will.

Prior to his death six years ago at the age of 75, Freddy Wieland opted to leave his fortune to his daughters from a previous relationship. His call meant that ex-wife Karen and their daughter Amber were completely cut out of his will.

Jasmine and Jade Wieland were named as the main beneficiaries following his death and now the two separate family sides have had to battle it out in court for possession of his estate. Now, Karen is contesting his fortune. The pair married in 1996 and welcomed daughter Amber. Together, Karen and Freddy bought a buy-to-let property empire in Buckinghamshire which his now said to be worth over £1million.

The couple initially split in 2013, before briefly reconciling when Freddy first became ill with cancer. However, they soon separated again and got divorced, with the official documents going through a year before he died in 2018.

The star rose to fame as a member of Aussie band The Strangers, in which he was a guitarist. He later joined The Mixtures and the band had success with a cover of Mungo Jerry's In the Summertime. They followed it up with a Pushbike Song, which reached number two in the UK charts.

Before his death, Freddy confirmed his final will and left everything to Jasmine and Jade. He also appointed Jasmine as administrator of his estate. Now, Karen and Jasmine are locked in two court battles. Karen is suing for “reasonable provision”, which means she wants a fair share of her ex-husband’s fortune. She is suing under the Inheritance Act 1975.

Jasmine is also battling for half of her dad's £1 million property portfolio he shared with his ex. She is trying to make it go into her late dad's estate despite Karen's claims it is all hers. According to the Sun, Karen's barrister, George Woodhead told the court: “Karen’s case is that when she and the deceased decided to divorce, they entered into a written agreement in respect of the properties and the ownership of them. Karen claims that, as part of an agreement following the separation, Freddy had agreed that she would have his beneficial interest in the properties for a payment of £50,000.”

It was claimed by the barrister that the pair had agreed to split their wealth. "Her case is that whilst she was working as a letting agent in 2002, she decided it would be sensible to provide for her retirement by acquiring buy to let properties,” Woodhead said. “She ultimately purchased all 11 of the properties, and did so in joint names with the deceased. Her case is that she and the deceased jointly intended that the properties would provide an income for her during her retirement.

“It was Karen who sourced, purchased and managed each property – and Karen was the landlady when each property was let.”

However, according to Jasmine's barrister, the agreement isn't valid due to Karen's failure to pay the £50,000 needed before Freddy's death. Barrister James Kemp claimed the agreement had “not been carried out” and has “therefore been rescinded". He all claimed Karen hadn't disclosed all of the relevant evidence about her financial dealings at the time of the agreement.

The final call over whether Freddy still had shares in the properties when he died will be made next year in April. It is then that Karen will discover if her claim against the estate can resume.

Follow Mirror Celebs on TikTok , Snapchat , Instagram , Twitter , Facebook , YouTube and Threads .