Harrods is accused of delaying payouts to Mohammed Al Fayed's alleged victims with 'crusader' act as it battles to strip widow and daughters of control of his £118million estate

Harrods' determination to portray itself as a 'crusader' fighting for those allegedly abused by Mohammed Al Fayed is only serving to delay their compensation payouts, the High Court has heard.The department store has applied to remove the businessman's widow, Heini Wathen-Fayed, and daughters Jasmine and Camilla as executors of his estate, which is facing claims for compensation from hundreds of women he allegedly abused.Lawyers for the department store argue the Fayeds cannot objectively manage the claims and must be replaced with independent solicitors, and that the £118million estate risks insolvency under the weight of the damages sought. The Fayeds deny the claims. Al Fayed married his wife in 1985, with whom he had Jasmine, Camilla and their brothers Karim and Omar. He owned Harrods between 1985 and 2010, and died in August 2023 aged 94. Allegations that he raped and sexually abused hundreds of women emerged after his death.More than 300 people are seeking damages from the estate and Harrods, with legal firm KP Law (KPL) seeking £150million for 270 claimants alone. The Knightsbridge store is also pursuing the estate to be reimbursed for payouts it has made to staff.Harrods' case, and the image of itself it is seeking to portray in the media, is ultimately frustrating the family's 'active' efforts to settle survivors' claims, lawyers representing the Egyptian businessman's family told the High Court today.They said the Fayeds are being guided by professional advisors and bearing the costs of settlements themselves – costs that they said Harrods would look to deduct. Mohamed Al Fayed (second right) pictured with his sons Omar (left) and Karim (second left), his wife Heini Wathen-Fayed (centre) and daughter Camilla Al Fayed (right) in 2010The hearing, before Judge Karen Shulman, has exposed a rift amongst those seeking damages: more than eight in 10 survivors, largely represented by KPL, support keeping the family as executors while those represented by other firms do not.Tracey Angus KC, for Jasmine, said: 'It's clearly not expedient to replace the current representatives with representatives that the majority of the claimants, through their lawyers, think is a bad idea because it will cause delay and extra expense.'Jasmine, a 45-year-old fashion designer, found it 'startling' that Harrods wanted to replace the executors, she said, and believed the store would be in an 'immediate' conflict of interest given its financial interest in the estate.She added: 'My client is concerned that Harrods is portraying itself as a crusader on behalf of claimants when in fact the impact of the relief they are seeking is to have already delayed the administration of this estate.'The court previously heard the estate's value was held in Levantine Investments Holdings Limited (LIHL), a British Virgin Islands (BVI) firm whose value is derived from a £97million loan note plus £20million of accrued interest. Lawyers said its UK assets have a net value of 'nil'.The £97million is owed to the firm by Mafco Holdings Ltd, registered in Bermuda. Shares in Mafco were held in a trust created by Al Fayed of which he was a beneficiary whilst alive, court documents show.Ms Angus told the court that Harrods would 'delay the resolution of claims' were it successful, as realising LIHL's value as tangible cash requires a grant from a BVI court.'All of this is causing more expense and delay. We need to let the first and second defendants take out the BVI grant,' she said.The court also heard that Ms Wathen-Fayed, who attended on Wednesday in a dark blue suit and silk print scarf, has now stopped doubting those who say they were abused, having previously told her lawyers that she did 'not believe' their accounts.The 71-year-old Finnish socialite was sat just a few feet from some of those allegedly preyed upon by her husband as her barrister, Stephen Moverley Smith KC, said statements submitted to the court showed this 'no longer represents her considered view'.He said: 'You will also have in mind the fact... that these views were readily understandable after her husband's death.' Heini pictured leaving the High Court in London on Wednesday following the second day of the hearing. She now says she believes those who say her husband abused themPenelope Reed KC, for Harrods, denied that the store was delaying matters, and said the Fayeds should be stripped of their executor role owing to 'special circumstances'.Ms Wathen-Fayed and her daughters cannot deal with settlements in an 'objective' way, she said, and claimed law firm KPL was given 'preferential treatment' in talks over settlements compared with other firms.Ms Reed said: 'We are not wedded to our candidates. We have not chosen them because we might get an easy ride, we have chosen them because of their status.'If other candidates are put forward and they are independent administrators, and are professionals, that is not something we would stand in the way of.'But Mr Moverley Smith, who also represents 41-year-old Camilla, said the Fayeds were acting 'entirely dispassionately' and actively engaging with claimants.He accused law firm Leigh Day of 'hindering' the process by refusing to agree to a memorandum of understanding – a document outlining the basic terms of any settlement – on behalf of its 60 claimants that would move the process forward.Leigh Day is not directly involved in the estate dispute but its partner, Richard Meeran, told the Daily Mail following Wednesday's hearing that it 'took the view that participating in the proposed memorandum of understanding was clearly not in our clients’ best interests.'The Fayeds' lawyers also accused Harrods of a 'fishing expedition' after it tried to compel the estate to answer 14 questions on LIHN, Mafco and other firms allegedly linked to the Fayeds, for which it was only given one response by order of a judge.These included Hyde Park Residence Ltd (HPRL), a firm in which Ms Wathen-Fayed was a director until July last year. Court submissions state Mr Al Fayed's nominee shares were transferred to Prestige Properties SA, a firm registered in Liechtenstein, in July 2024. Harrods claims that the Fayeds cannot handle claims from abuse survivors objectively - a claim the family deniesMr Moverley Smith told the hearing HPRL was 'not something the estate has any interest in' and was 'entirely valueless' regardless as it was carrying £20million of negative equity.He said: 'Have matters been dealt with properly? The answer is plainly yes.'You have seen in confirming the executors will be guided by professional advisers on any settlement, and in that they are acting entirely dispassionately.'Where necessary, they will seek the guidance of the court. And they will do that at their own cost.'He concluded: 'This is an application that should never have been progressed. Harrods' hand has been forced by the story it has spun for the media.'It was left the uncomfortable choice of continuing the case or withdrawing the claim in the glare of publicity.'Regrettably it chose the course of macabrism... with a smattering of firms supporting. The case must be dismissed with costs.'The KC was briefly chastised by the judge for referring to those who had allegedly been abused by Al Fayed as 'just' five claimants. The exchange prompted one member of the packed courtroom to leave.Judge Karen Shulman said: 'This is a highly uncommon case given the large number of complainants in this case, the redress scheme set up by Harrods, and the executors.'It troubles me that there should be no delay in moving this forward.'The court previously heard that Al Fayed's son Omar is challenging an amendment to his father's will that saw him replaced as an executor by Jasmine and supports the replacement of his family as executors. His brother Karim opposes the change.The case is rooted in compensation claims launched against Harrods and the Al Fayed estate after the store established a redress scheme for survivors, offering survivors up to £385,000 from a pot initially valued at £60million.Harrods says more than 250 people have 'engaged' with the scheme and as of last month more than 110 people have been compensated. Written submissions to the High Court suggest £6.1million has been paid out to date. But more than 300 other women are seeking settlements directly after rejecting the scheme over concerns about its administration.The hearing is due to conclude tomorrow.