The torrent of top bosses admitting to pledging their company shares to finance their private lives turned into a tsunami today as the likes of Sir Nigel Rudd, Dame Marjorie Scardino and Tory carpet king Lord Harris all confessed.

Today is the deadline for company directors to admit they have used shares as security with third parties to raise private funds after the Financial Services Authority ordered a "come clean" amnesty earlier this month.

The issue was sparked after the Carphone Warehouse retail giant was destabilised by the revelation that its chairman and 20% shareholder David Ross had pledged £130 million worth of shares with outside parties to raise funds to shore up his struggling private property enterprises.

Ross had to resign his job as well as his chairmanship of National Express amid fears that such pledges could see company shares ending up in the hands of undisclosed parties.

Today one of the biggest beasts in the corporate world, Sir Nigel Rudd, came out of the woodwork and admitted he had pledged much of his 2% stake in Britain's biggest motor dealer, Pendragon, as long ago as 2003.

Rudd, who is chairman of BAA and who has just announced he is stepping down from the board of Barclays, said he had pledged the shares to secure an overdraft facility. Scardino admitted pledging around one-third of her holding in Financial Times owner Pearson from March 2006 to HSBC. She used the shares "along with a range of other assets" to secure personal borrowings.

Harris, chairman and chief executive of Carpetright and a benefactor of the Conservative party, said he and his private companies had pledged 12.7 million shares, adding up to nearly 20% of the company and valued at times over the past year at more than £100 million. The peer did not disclose why the shares had been pledged. In recent days Barclays' head of retail banking Frits Seegers and City tycoon Michael Spencer have been among others admitting to share pledging.

After the Ross uproar, the FSA has ruled that the practice is not illegal but it would take action against directors who do not inform their companies of such transactions and would take action against companies that subsequently do not tell the market.