May 21, 1999
 
 
 

                   Merrill Wished Upon a Star Banker
                   But Wound Up in a Singapore Sling

                   By DARREN MCDERMOTT and SARA WEBB
                   Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

                   When Merrill Lynch & Co. won a fraud case against its former star private
                   banker in Singapore last week, it largely brought to a close an
                   embarrassing episode for the Wall Street securities firm.

                   Singapore's High Court found that
                   Kevin Wallace, once the banker to
                   many of Southeast Asia's wealthiest
                   tycoons, had engaged in
                   unauthorized trading. It ordered him
                   to pay Merrill $25.2 million to cover
                   settlement payments the firm made
                   to his clients.

                   Yet one question remains: How
                   could a single banker circumvent
                   Merrill's accounting, compliance and
                   auditing operations -- in the case of
                   some clients, for several years?

                   Previously undisclosed documents filed in connection with the case, along
                   with testimony last week, detail how Mr. Wallace allegedly forged account
                   statements, intercepted client mail and kept his clients and his supervisors
                   from reviewing account activity together. In affidavits and in court, senior
                   Merrill executives acknowledged that their compliance systems had been
                   compromised, and the firm says changes have since been made.

                                        How could Merrill not have known earlier? It
                                        was only after Mr. Wallace left the firm in
                                        1997 that Merrill realized something was
                   amiss, Merrill officials say. "We were not aware at all" of Mr. Wallace's
                   unauthorized activities, his boss, Syed Elias Bin Abdul Rahman Alhabshi,
                   testified. Mr. Elias described the former banker as "very dominating,"
                   adding that Mr. Wallace prevented him meeting alone with Mr. Wallace's
                   clients, and possibly had found a way to intercept clients' faxes to the firm.

                   Mr. Wallace, through his lawyers, denied unauthorized trading and forgery,
                   but acknowledged putting his own money into clients' accounts to make up
                   for losses.

                   Mr. Wallace's alleged deeds pale in comparison with those of others
                   accused of being "rogue" traders or bankers. Nick Leeson, who brought
                   down Barings PLC in 1994 with losses of $1.38 billion from unauthorized
                   trading, is in a Singapore jail cell. And Yasuo Hamanaka, whose illicit
                   copper trades cost Sumitomo Corp. $2.6 billion in losses, was sentenced
                   to eight years in prison for fraud and forgery. Mr. Wallace's whereabouts,
                   on the other hand, aren't known; his lawyer said last week that Mr.
                   Wallace had been in Spain but that he wasn't sure where the banker is
                   now. That could make it difficult for Merrill to get back all of its money.

                   A Harvard Business School graduate, Mr. Wallace, now 48 years old,
                   had more than a decade of experience as an investment banker in Asia
                   when he joined Merrill Lynch in Singapore in late 1990. Merrill was
                   pushing hard to grab private-banking business from European banks; Mr.
                   Wallace seemed an ideal envoy between Asia's new rich and Merrill's
                   financial firepower. As word spread, Mr. Wallace's client list grew to
                   include top Indonesian tycoons; he was sometimes seen in the company of
                   former President Suharto's son Bambang Trihatmodjo.

                   Mr. Wallace generated significant profits for Merrill, and was rewarded
                   with a generous compensation package based largely on commissions on
                   trading in his clients' accounts. Between 1993 and 1997, Merrill paid him a
                   total of $13.5 million, according to a report by receivers investigating his
                   world-wide assets.

                   Merrill had warned Mr. Wallace as early as 1993 about "certain breaches
                   of internal policies and internal regulations," Raymundo Yu, Merrill's head
                   of private banking in Asia, said in an affidavit. But Merrill spokesman Bill
                   Halldin said the firm wasn't alerted to any "wrongdoing" until April 1997,
                   when Merrill discovered Mr. Wallace had breached its rules by placing
                   shares in a Malaysian company into some of his clients' accounts. The
                   company, Country Heights Bhd., wasn't on the firm's research list, and the
                   transaction wasn't a Merrill-led venture, which meant Mr. Wallace wasn't
                   supposed to buy the shares at all.

                   Mr. Wallace was asked to resign. After he left in May 1997, Merrill told
                   the court, the company found several cases of unauthorized trading, which
                   led to substantial losses for some clients. The firm said Mr. Wallace
                   doctored account statements so that clients weren't aware of the true value
                   of their portfolios; he forged clients' signatures to make it look as though he
                   had their approval for transactions and, in some cases, to take out loans
                   against their portfolios.

                   Altogether, about 40 of Mr. Wallace's 160 clients complained about his
                   handling of their accounts, Merrill said. Account statements and trading
                   records show that he used clients' money to trade often in a variety of risky
                   stocks. None of those clients had given the requisite permission, Merrill
                   said.

                   Yet Mr. Wallace's trading didn't set off alarm bells. Merrill's spokesman,
                   Mr. Halldin, maintained it is difficult for any firm to detect unauthorized
                   trades in an account without input from the client. He said it is common for
                   a client to call up his or her banker and authorize a trade over the phone,
                   and those conversations aren't taped. "The clients here were persuaded by
                   Mr. Wallace that they didn't have to look at documents from Merrill Lynch
                   or that they were incorrect," he said.

                   Trading records show that Mr. Wallace made some spectacular blunders;
                   in one case, he bought shares in Bre-X Minerals Ltd., the scandal-plagued
                   Canadian gold-mining company, at US$22 per share, holding the stock
                   until it was virtually worthless.

                   Many clients weren't aware of the losses in their accounts until after Mr.
                   Wallace left Merrill, the company's records show. One client, code-named
                   JJA, was the subject of an internal Merrill memo dated June 1997. "Mr.
                   JJA has received our latest summary of investments and was shocked that
                   his equity has dwindled to just over US$100,000," the memo said. "He
                   said Kevin [Wallace] had visited him in Sri Lanka about a month and a half
                   ago or two months ago, and he went through the statement with him, and
                   he had about US$1.4 million in the account."

                   In the case of a client code-named AM, Mr. Wallace assured AM that her
                   money was in U.S. bonds receiving "14% [interest per annum] without
                   capital risk," according to a letter from Mr. Wallace to AM. But, during
                   the five years he managed AM's account, it had losses of nearly US$4.9
                   million in a variety of stocks and bonds, according to trading records. All
                   this during a global stock boom and before Asia's financial crisis took its
                   toll on stocks.

                   There were warning signs. One client received two margin-maintenance
                   reminders, or requests for additional sums that Merrill holds as insurance
                   against trading by clients with borrowed money, even though this client had
                   specified that the account was not to engage in frequent trading. But the
                   client was satisfied by a call from Mr. Wallace saying the reminders were a
                   mistake, according to correspondence between the client and Merrill.

                   How did Mr. Wallace maintain seemingly complete control over the
                   account information his clients received?

                   A central problem stemmed from his clients' desire for secrecy. Distrustful
                   of local postal services and worried about their wealth being more widely
                   known, many clients requested a "hold-all-mail" policy that provided for
                   Mr. Wallace to hand-carry account statements to them. Though the
                   account statements were issued by a separate Merrill division, that
                   arrangement enabled Mr. Wallace to alter statements before he passed
                   them to his clients, Merrill said in court.

                   In his affidavit, Mr. Wallace said he wasn't alone in having access to the
                   accounts and so could not have manipulated them as Merrill alleges. "I was
                   not the sole source of information to clients concerning their accounts and
                   all transactions concerning the accounts would be approved by my branch
                   manager or his deputy," Mr. Wallace said. His boss, Mr. Elias, would
                   have seen daily trading records and monthly client statements, Mr. Wallace
                   added.

                   Mr. Elias, 55, who has since retired, testified that it wasn't so simple. Mr.
                   Wallace "insisted his clients were very confidential, high-net-worth
                   individuals" in Indonesia, he said, adding that Mr. Wallace was adamant
                   that Mr. Elias could only meet Mr. Wallace's clients in his presence.

                   "As a matter of routine I would request meeting clients once a month," Mr.
                   Elias told the court. He would arrange to go to Jakarta for one or two
                   days to meet with six or seven clients, but "when I got there, there's always
                   a message the client has called up to say he's meeting with a minister," or
                   could not get together for some other reason.

                   And even though Mr. Elias was able to see daily trading reports, he said in
                   court that these reports simply pick up what is on the trading tickets; the
                   reports would not flag tickets for trades that hadn't been authorized.

                   Mr. Elias was supposed to authorize all outgoing correspondence to
                   clients, but Mr. Wallace sent and received faxes directly, Merrill said.
                   Even though the room where faxes arrived was locked, Mr. Elias testified,
                   "We suspect very strongly that faxes were taken away before we could
                   check them ... . We were not aware at all" of what was going on.

                   Mr. Wallace said in his affidavit that it's "inconceivable" he could have
                   manipulated trading and account statements "on an independent basis
                   within an organization such as the plaintiff's company without an entire
                   network within the company knowing exactly what was going on."

                   Mr. Halldin of Merrill said the firm has "strengthened our procedures in
                   terms of delivery" of statements and has made other changes in its
                   private-client operations, although he wouldn't disclose details. But he
                   rejected the notion that Merrill should have been expected to prevent the
                   losses: "When an employee is intent on committing a fraud, no system, no
                   matter how good, can always prevent that."