300 reps in limbo as Jesup & Lamont Securities slips below net-cap requirements

B-D receives cease-business letter from Finra; company disputes finding

Jun 21, 2010 @ 1:37 pm

By Bruce Kelly

In what has become an all-too-familiar scene, another broker-dealer has ceased operations after failing to have sufficient capital on hand.

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc. on Friday said that the retail-securities unit of publicly traded Jesup & Lamont Inc. was out of compliance for failing to meet the net-capital requirements mandated by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Due to the violation, Finra ordered Jesup & Lamont Securities Corp. and its 300 reps to cease conducting business other than liquidating transactions.

According to a press release issued today, however, Jesup & Lamont disputes Finra's action and is seeking its reversal. The firm's management said that it has taken other steps to remedy the net-capital deficiency and is seeking to show that the securities unit is in compliance.

As of March 31, Jesup & Lamont Securities had net capital of $771,652, which was $521,652 in excess of the minimum net-capital requirement, the firm's parent company said last month in its 10-Q filing with the SEC. That filing also revealed that parent Jesup & Lamont Inc. has been losing money of late. Over the first three months of the year, the company lost $3.75 million, compared to a loss of $2.9 million for the same time period in 2009.

The parent company has been working to beef up its capital position for months, to no avail so far. In February, the firm said it reached an agreement in principle with Tri-Artisan Capital Partners LLC, a merchant bank, to combine the two firms. Part of the deal was the completion of a capital-raising “to fund the combined company's growth plan,” according to a press release at the time.

The deal was supposed to close by the end of the second quarter, but it is not clear whether the transaction was ever completed. Gerald Cromack, co-managing partner with Tri-Artisan, was not available in the early afternoon to comment.

But an executive familiar with net-capital rules, who asked not to be identified, said a net capital-requirement notice from Finra is often "a death sentence." Although the executive did acknowledge that there is potential for an order to be reversed, he noted that said such reversals hinge on negotiations about the cause and amount of the capital deficiency — such as legal liabilities — along with plans to rectify the shortfall.

"If Finra thinks it's time to go, they are all-powerful," the executive said. "Finra holds all the cards here."

Certainly, receiving a a cease-business letter is not an encouraging sign for a brokerage. Jesup & Lamont Securities is at least the second firm in the last three months that Finra sent such notifications to for failing to meet net-cap requirements. In March, Finra told GunnAllen Financial Inc., an independent broker-dealer with about 400 reps, that it was violation of its net-capital requirements. (See a full timeline of B-D closings here.)

Finra recently has informed other small to midsize broker-dealers that the lack of adequate reserves is a serious issue. In November, Finra said Cullum & Burks Securities Inc. was in violation of its net-capital requirement. The firm then raised additional capital to continue normal operations, according to its Finra record.

That was not enough. Finra in May suspended the license of Cullum & Burks, which was heavily involved in the sale of private placements that went bust.

Jesup & Lamont has been on Finra's radar at least since April. According to the firm's profile on Finra's BrokerCheck database, the firm “failed to timely respond to Finra requests for documents and information.”

That request for documents was related to a nasty legal fight in March between Jesup & Lamont, Finra and Penson Financial Services Inc., one of Jesup & Lamont's former clearing firms. Jesup & Lamont accused Penson of conspiring with Finra to shut down a former Jesup unit, Empire Financial Group Inc., and of helping another Penson correspondent firm raid Empire's profitable trading desk.

That dispute went to Finra arbitration. It's not clear whether that legal fight contributed to the firm's net-capital violation.

Regardless, recruiters were calling Jesup & Lamont's brokers Monday morning, trying to turn the firm's misfortune to their advantage, sources said.

Alan Weichselbaum, who was named Jesup & Lamont Securities' CEO just last month, was not available Monday morning to comment.

0
Comments

What do you think?

View comments

Upcoming event

Sep 24

Conference

Diversity & Inclusion Awards

Attend an event celebrating diversity and inclusion as well as recognizing those who are leading the financial services profession in this important endeavor. Join InvestmentNews, as we strive to raise awareness, educate and inspire an... Learn more

Most watched

Events

Finding innovation in your firm

Adam Holt of AssetMap explains how advisers understand they need to grow, but great innovation may be lurking right under your nose.

Events

Finding your edge from Tony Robbins

Guru Tony Robbins has helped a lot of people, but armed with his psychology Financial Advisor Josh Nelson has helped his practice soar.

Latest news & opinion

The growth of factor-based investing

Advisers are making decisions about clients' portfolios by using the same characteristics that govern factor-based ETFs.

Finra makes its list to target hundreds of rogue individuals

The regulator sees patterns in the behavior and disclosures of high-risk brokers.

LTC insurer offering co-pays to blunt soaring premium increases

John Hancock policyholders would get a discount on their premium in return for agreeing to pay a bigger portion of their claims in the future.

Goldman Sachs acquires United Capital

After a payday of $75 million or more, CEO Joe Duran plans to join Goldman in a senior position.

Private equity loves IBDs, but will that last?

Three big acquisitions in less than a year signals renewed life in the formerly beleaguered industry.

X

Hi! Glad you're here and we hope you like all the great work we do here at InvestmentNews. But what we do is expensive and is funded in part by our sponsors. So won't you show our sponsors a little love by whitelisting investmentnews.com? It'll help us continue to serve you.

Yes, show me how to whitelist investmentnews.com

Ad blocker detected. Please whitelist us or give premium a try.

X

Subscribe and Save 60%

Premium Access
Print + Digital

Learn more
Subscribe to Print