| |
BUSINESS: STOCK MARKETS
Between The Fine Print
The biggest irony
is that most depositors in vyaj badla opted for it because they did not
want to be swindled by a stocks scam. The assured annualised returns of
around 16 per cent on these instruments certified by the stock exchange
made badla financing attractive. Says Jigar Shah, analyst with KRC Research,
a stock-broking firm: "Vyaj badla is a lucrative but risky option
because there is no direct mechanism available for the financier to keep
a check on his broker's activities. It mostly works on mutual trust and
faith."
But trust and faith are transient qualities
in the stock market. When prices began to slide, many brokers were caught
on the wrong side of the ledger. Payments became a problem and investors
were in trouble. By the time depositors started looking at the fine print,
the brokers, and their money, were gone.
|
HOW BADLA WORKED
|
|
|
1 Investor
buys shares but does not take delivery. The transaction is carried
forward to the next settlement by paying interest (badla) on the
outstanding amount.
2 Broker
bridges the gap between the margin and the full value of shares
by borrowing from the lending mechanism of stock exchanges.
3 Apart from
official lending, brokers also borrow funds from individuals to
finance badla transactions. This is the vyaj badla.
THE NEW RULE
4 In rolling
settlement, the investor has to settle the transactions on the same
day by paying the full amount.
|
|
In many cases, even reading the fine print wouldn't
have helped. Laxmi Narain, 74, invested Rs 15 lakh in badla with NSE member
Bhavesh Sethia of Bhavesh Dhirajlal Stockbroking Company in January 2001.
When the scam broke out, Narain decided to pull out his funds but found
that his money had not been invested in ALBM at all. Not just that, Sethia
had all along been issuing forged certificates. Panic stricken, Narain
rushed to the police along with 45 others who have together lost Rs 60
crore.
Although Sethia was arrested in April, neither
the NSE nor SEBI have acted on the complaints. Their argument: action
can be taken against a broker only if he defaults on payments. Says M.L.
Soneji, vice-president, National Security Clearing Corporation: "There
is no guarantee against frauds." Narain and others have now written
to Union Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha to intervene. His intervention
may not help though. For one, the deposits are not secured. There is also
little evidence to nail the accused. Most of them had lent money in the
unofficial market in the badly regulated CSE.
When the CSE's unofficial market, which helped
buyers build positions without paying any margin, collapsed in early March,
it had a cascading effect on the BSE and NSE. Brokers simply threw up
their hands and exchange officials, too busy with SEBI's probe, paid scant
regard to investors' complaints.
It's a typically Indian scenario. Greedy investors
ignore the pitfalls of unsecured debt. Brokers exploit this and punt with
their money. Exchanges dub this an off-market problem. SEBI maintains
it is yet to receive any complaint. Police admit there are complaints
but don't know how to handle them. In the end, the investor is the loser.
Always.
|
|