Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Former Kidder Peabody chief 'lacked a licence': New York Stock Exchange looking into possible penalties

Larry Black
Wednesday 17 August 1994 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

This election is still a dead heat, according to most polls. In a fight with such wafer-thin margins, we need reporters on the ground talking to the people Trump and Harris are courting. Your support allows us to keep sending journalists to the story.

The Independent is trusted by 27 million Americans from across the entire political spectrum every month. Unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock you out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. But quality journalism must still be paid for.

Help us keep bring these critical stories to light. Your support makes all the difference.

EVERYTHING has gone wrong for Kidder Peabody this year: its accounting system failed to detect dollars 350m of phantom trading profits; the market for its main business, mortgage-backed securities, has collapsed; and the New York business press has started comparing it to Drexel Burnham Lambert before its fall.

It was almost as though no one was at the steering wheel at Kidder, owned by America's General Electric and run, until his resignation in June, by British-born Michael Carpenter. It now emerges that Mr Carpenter was driving without a licence.

Fortune magazine reports in its forthcoming issue that Mr Carpenter did not take the industry exam for brokerage managers until last year.

Kidder says he was not obliged to hold a brokerage principal's licence issued by the National Association of Securities Dealers, because he held no position at the brokerage subsidiary, Kidder Peabody and Company. He was chief executive of the firm's holding company, Kidder Peabody Group. The firm itself was run by a 'partnership of senior executives', all licenced, a spokesman said.

Mr Carpenter took and passed the exam at his lawyer's suggestion in March 1993. But the NYSE believes he should have registered with the NASD, and is looking into possible penalties.

(Photograph omitted)

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in