Former MasterChef contestant Aaron Thomas claims he owed big salary Mr Thomas, 26, formerly of Brighton, has valued his stake in his investment business, Actium Holding, at $16-80 million Replica Cartier Love Bracelets, according to a list of assets filed before the UK High Court Chancery Division. Oakmont Resources, which controls a Brazilian ore operation, claims that Mr Thomas, 26, its former chief executive, swindled millions to fund a lavish lifestyle of first-class travel and expensive gifts for his fiancee Thaiana Rodrigues Replica Cartier Rings, who is also being sued. Mr Thomas, whose MasterChef performance prompted restaurateur George Calombaris to give him an apprenticeship in 2009, returned to finance in founding Oakmont Replica Cartier Bracelets. But he is now embroiled in a court battle stretching from London to Manhattan. The Victorian – who now lives in New York in an up-market apartment leased for $14,500 a month – was owed of $303,000 for January and February, he claims. Oakmont accuses him of using company money to pay for personal items, trips and services, including a private jet, luxury yacht, high-end Rolex and Hublot watches and a $171,000 Tiffany engagement ring for his fiancee, according to documents before the New York Supreme Court. Other court documents list outlays include a Las Vegas bachelor party valued at $133,000, $20,000 for breast implants for Ms Rodrigues, trips to Paris, Australia, Greece, Japan and St Lucia, a $30,000 Cartier Love bracelet, and school fees. Oakmont has obtained a global order from the UK and US courts to prevent assets being moved as it continues its action to recover what it claims were personal costs misappropriated in the guise of business expenses. The company says it has identified about $5 million in expenditure, of which about $2.5 million is unaccounted for. Thomas used the company bank accounts as a personal piggy bank, withdrawing substantial sums of money and transferring them to his personal accounts and to family and friends, it claims. Mr Thomas argues money spent was part of an agreed remuneration package; Oakmont argues that board minutes were retrospectively amended to cover Mr Thomas alleged conduct.