Thai masseuse is embroiled in bitter court fight after £434,000 of her late husband’s money ‘mistakenly’ ended up in his ex-wife’s bank account

A Thai masseuse has been caught up in a bitter court fight after £434,000 of her late husband’s money ‘accidentally’ ended up in his ex-wife’s bank account.

Successful corporate lawyer Bartholomew Gold died in December 2020, aged just 43, leaving behind his widow Phikul Harte, 43, and his stunning £2 million Hampshire seaside home.

Mr Gold, previously a ‘rising star’ at leading City law firm Field Fisher, died before he could prepare his will.

Under intestacy laws, his estate would be divided between his widow and his teenage son from his previous marriage to AirBnB stewardess Marsha Gomez.

But a bitter court dispute was triggered when £434,134 was ‘accidentally’ transferred to the account of Ms Gomez, 49.

This led masseuse Mrs Harte to claim that her deceased husband’s ex-wife had ‘distributed and misused’ the money.

Ms Gomez was unable to repay the money after a judge ordered her to do so last year.

Mr Gold’s widow is now suing to extend the order freezing her ex-lover’s assets.

A bitter court dispute was triggered after £434,134 of Mr Gold’s money was ‘accidentally’ transferred to the account of his ex-wife Marsha Gomez, 49 (pictured)

It says Ms Gomez squandered much of the money on ‘speculative investments’, gifts to unknown ‘third parties’ and new double glazing, and without a freeze, there was a risk her assets would be ‘dissipated’ without the money being returned.

But despite agreeing to take and use the money after admitting to losing £275,000 on a failed investment in her son’s name, Ms Gomez insists she intends to repay the debt and is not at risk of getting rid of her assets to avoid doing so.

Central London District Court heard Mr Gold, a former intellectual property expert and partner at leading law firm Field Fisher, married Ms Harte after divorcing his previous wife, Ms Gomez.

They lived together in a seven-bedroom beach house in Langstone, Hampshire, known as Bartholomew House, which had a spa, private boathouse and extensive private sea frontage.

The facility was also operated as a guesthouse and as a therapy room by Ms. Harte, where she specialized in a combination of both eastern and western massage.

Mr Gold died intestate in 2020 and his estate, estimated to be worth £800,000 after expenses, was split between his widow and teenage son.

Under the rules of wills, Mrs Harte was to receive the first £322,000 of her estate as his widow and split the remainder equally with her husband’s son.

But problems arose after his death when £434,134 from the sale of his home, marketed at £2 million, and its contents were ‘accidentally’ paid to Ms Gomez in early 2024.

The case went to the High Court last April when Deputy Coroner Master John Linwood declared that Mr Gold had died intestate and that the proceeds of the sale of Barthomolew House belonged to him.

Miss Harte (pictured) lived with Mr Gold at his seven-bedroom beach house in Langstone, Hampshire.

Moreover, the judge stripped Mrs Gomez of being the personal representative of her ex-husband’s estate, ordered her to repay him a total of £447,427 including interest, and rejected her claim for a ‘estate estoppel’ for the right to any share of the property.

But Ms Gomez has since failed to make up the missing money and the case came before Judge Alan Johns KC at Central London District Court last week.

Her lawyers asked the judge to extend an injunction granted in January, which prevented Ms Gomez from dealing in ‘proprietary assets’ such as certain shares and bonus bonds and froze her household income and froze her own assets to the value of £650,000.

Lawyer Emma Germany, on behalf of Ms Harte, said Ms Gomez had distributed a significant sum of money in June 2024, when she was already aware that a claim existed for this.

He said £38,877 went towards mortgage repayments, £35,724 towards credit card and loan bills, and £34,308 towards ‘miscellaneous items’ including new double glazed windows at one of his homes and ‘general living expenses’.

In her own statement, Ms Gomez said: ‘There is no dispute that I received a sum of approximately £435,000. I then invested £275,000 of this money… The shares were purchased in my son’s name.

‘The remaining £160,000 was then spent, gifted and used to pay legal fees totaling between £30,000 and £40,000. In short, the money is therefore not ready to be paid to the plaintiff as it has been distributed.’

Arguing that the injunction should be frozen because there was a “real and ongoing risk of dissipation” before the money was returned, the barrister said Ms Gomez had maintained throughout the High Court hearings that she held onto the funds and kept them “safe”.

‘It is clear from the defendant’s witness statement in October and his final statements that this is not true,’ he said.

But Ms Gomez, along with her lawyer Suleman Shams, oppose the proposed injunction, arguing that continuing the injunction would be ‘unnecessary and disproportionate’, adding that it was ‘unsupported by evidence of a real risk of unfair distribution’.

The lawyer said that the asset freezing decision had a devastating effect on his personal and financial life, and even stated that access to one of his accounts was blocked for a month after his bank learned of the measure.

But his lawyer insisted he was willing to ‘resolve his debt’ and could repay Ms Harte and her estate thanks to his lucrative property portfolio.

He now has equity of £875,000, comprising a £1.1 million house in Chesterfield Gardens in Haringey, north London, and two properties on nearby Endymion Road.

“Her evidence is that she has been marketing Chesterfield Gardens since mid-2025 to resolve her debt,” Mr Shams told Judge Alan Johns KC, adding that Ms Gomez was prepared to accept a legal charge of £434,134 on her estate, which would provide ‘alternative security’ to the ongoing injunction.

Mr Gold, previously a ‘rising star’ at the City’s leading law firm Field Fisher, died before he could prepare his will

Attacking the injunction as ‘draconian’, Mr Shams said it limited Ms Gomez’s ‘ordinary living expenses’ to £500 per week and told the court: ‘The evidence shows that she has ongoing property and operating expenses, including Airbnb-related costs, and the injunction affects her ability to meet them.

‘Freezing injunctive relief should not be imposed in a way that prevents a person from living or preserving assets that also serve the plaintiff’s enforcement interest,’ he said.

In addition, he said that Ms Gomez intends to bring legal action against her ex-husband’s estate over debts allegedly owed to her, which will ‘recover a significant portion of the sums owed to Ms Harte’.

After a day in court, Judge Johns reserved his decision on whether to continue the freeze.