UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-QSB
(Mark One)
[X] QUARTERLY REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT
OF 1934
For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2002
[ ] TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT
OF 1934
For the transition period from _________to _________
Commission file number 0-14528
CENTURY PENSION INCOME FUND XXIII
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
California 94-2963120
(State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer
incorporation or organization) Identification No.)
55 Beattie Place, P.O. Box 1089
Greenville, South Carolina 29602
(Address of principal executive offices)
(864) 239-1000
(Issuer's telephone number)
PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION
ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
CENTURY PENSION INCOME FUND XXIII
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF NET LIABILITIES IN LIQUIDATION
(Unaudited)
(in thousands)
September 30, 2002
Assets
Cash and cash equivalents $ 594
Receivables and deposits 106
Debt trustee escrow 625
Investment property 2,820
4,145
Liabilities
Accounts payable 4
Tenant security deposit liabilities 3
Accrued property taxes 58
Other liabilities 95
Non-recourse promissory notes:
Principal 11,847
Interest payable 15,784
Estimated costs during the period of liquidation 677
28,468
Net liabilities in liquidation $(24,323)
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
CENTURY PENSION INCOME FUND XXIII
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN NET LIABILITIES IN LIQUIDATION
(Unaudited)
(in thousands)
For the Nine Months
Ended September 30,
2002 2001
Net liabilities in liquidation at beginning of period $(23,942) $(23,748)
Changes in net liabilities in liquidation attributed to:
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents 133 (820)
Decrease in receivables and deposits (5) (525)
(Decrease) increase in debt trustee escrow (18) 1,428
Increase in investment in properties -- 337
Decrease in accounts payable 6 58
Decrease (increase) in tenant security deposits 6 (1)
Increase in accrued property taxes (58) (52)
(Increase) decrease in other liabilities (22) 671
Increase in non-recourse promissory notes - interest
payable (1,045) (1,213)
Decrease in minority interest in consolidated joint
venture 170 168
Decrease in estimated costs during the period of
liquidation 452 358
Net liabilities in liquidation at end of period $(24,323) $(23,339)
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
CENTURY PENSION INCOME FUND XXIII
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
Note A - Basis of Presentation
As of December 31, 1999, Century Pension Income Fund XXIII (the "Partnership" or
"Registrant") adopted the liquidation basis of accounting due to the imminent
loss of its investment properties.
The Partnership's Nonrecourse Promissory Notes are secured by a deed of trust on
all properties owned in fee by the Partnership. The Notes were issued in two
series. The "1985 Series Notes", in the amount of $33,454,000 bear interest at
12% per annum, and the "1986 Series Notes", in the amount of $8,485,000, bear
interest at 10% per annum, except that portions of the interest were deferred,
provided the Partnership made minimum interest payments of 5% on the unpaid
principal balance. The Nonrecourse Promissory Notes had a balance of principal
and deferred interest of approximately $80,000,000 at their maturity date of
February 15, 1999. The Partnership was unable to satisfy the Nonrecourse
Promissory Notes at maturity and as a result, the Partnership was in default on
the Nonrecourse Promissory Notes. Fox Capital Management Corporation ("FCMC" or
the "Managing General Partner") contacted the indenture trustee for the
Nonrecourse Promissory Notes regarding this default. In connection with these
conversations, on July 30, 1999 the Partnership entered into a forbearance
agreement with the indenture trustee pursuant to which the indenture trustee
agreed not to exercise its rights and remedies under the indenture for up to 390
days. In turn, the Partnership agreed to (a) deliver to the indenture trustee
for the benefit of the noteholders all of the accumulated cash of the
Partnership, less certain reserves and anticipated operating expenses, (b)
market all of its properties for sale, (c) deliver all net cash proceeds from
any sales to the indenture trustee until the notes are fully satisfied and (d)
comply with the reporting requirements under the indenture. At the expiration of
the forbearance period, the Partnership had not sold all of its properties or
satisfied the Nonrecourse Promissory Notes. With the consent of the indenture
trustee, the forbearance period extension is being negotiated to accommodate the
sale of the Partnership's remaining asset, which is currently anticipated to
occur by the end of the first quarter of 2003. Based on current market
conditions, it is unlikely that the sale of the Partnership's remaining asset
will generate sufficient proceeds to pay off the Nonrecourse Promissory Notes in
full. If the Partnership cannot sell the property for sufficient value, in
accordance with the terms of the forbearance agreement, it is likely that the
Partnership will lose its property through delivery to an auctioneer. Upon the
sale or disposal of the last property, the Partnership is expected to terminate.
As a result of the decision to liquidate the Partnership, the Partnership
changed its basis of accounting for its financial statements at December 31,
1999, to the liquidation basis of accounting. Consequently, assets have been
valued at estimated net realizable value and liabilities are presented at their
estimated settlement amounts, including estimated costs associated with carrying
out the liquidation. The valuation of assets and liabilities necessarily
requires many estimates and assumptions and there are substantial uncertainties
in carrying out the liquidation. The actual realization of assets and settlement
of liabilities could be higher or lower than amounts indicated and is based upon
the Managing General Partner's estimates as of the date of the consolidated
financial statements.
Included in liabilities in the statement of net liabilities in liquidation as of
September 30, 2002 is approximately $677,000 of costs, net of income, that the
Managing General Partner estimates will be incurred during the period of
liquidation based on the assumption that the liquidation process will be
completed by March 31, 2003. Because the success in realization of assets and
the settlement of liabilities is based on the Managing General Partner's best
estimates, the liquidation period may be shorter than projected or it may be
extended beyond the projected period.
Note B - Transactions with Affiliated Parties
The Partnership has no employees and is dependent on the Managing General
Partner and its affiliates for the management and administration of all
partnership activities. The Partnership Agreement provides for certain payments
to affiliates for services and as reimbursement of certain expenses incurred by
affiliates on behalf of the Partnership.
An affiliate of the Managing General Partner received reimbursement of
accountable administrative expenses amounting to approximately $69,000, net of a
refund for prior year overpayment, and $116,000 for the nine months ended
September 30, 2002 and 2001, respectively.
Beginning in 2001, the Partnership began insuring its property up to certain
limits through coverage provided by AIMCO which is generally self-insured for a
portion of losses and liabilities related to workers compensation, property
casualty and vehicle liability. The Partnership insures its property above the
AIMCO limits through insurance policies obtained by AIMCO from insurers
unaffiliated with the Managing General Partner. During the nine months ended
September 30, 2002 and 2001, the Partnership was charged by AIMCO and its
affiliates approximately $19,000 and $12,000, respectively, for insurance
coverage and fees associated with policy claims administration.
Note C - Legal Proceedings
In March 1998, several putative unit holders of limited partnership units of the
Partnership commenced an action entitled Rosalie Nuanes, et al. v. Insignia
Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the
State of California for the County of San Mateo. The plaintiffs named as
defendants, among others, the Partnership, its Managing General Partner and
several of their affiliated partnerships and corporate entities. The action
purports to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and
derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the
Partnership) which are named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other
things, the acquisition of interests in certain Managing General Partner
entities by Insignia Financial Group, Inc. ("Insignia") and entities which were,
at one time, affiliates of Insignia; past tender offers by the Insignia
affiliates to acquire limited partnership units; management of the partnerships
by the Insignia affiliates; and the series of transactions which closed on
October 1, 1998 and February 26, 1999 whereby Insignia and Insignia Properties
Trust, respectively, were merged into AIMCO. The plaintiffs seek monetary
damages and equitable relief, including judicial dissolution of the Partnership.
On June 25, 1998, the Managing General Partner filed a motion seeking dismissal
of the action. In lieu of responding to the motion, the plaintiffs filed an
amended complaint. The Managing General Partner filed demurrers to the amended
complaint which were heard February 1999.
Pending the ruling on such demurrers, settlement negotiations commenced. On
November 2, 1999, the parties executed and filed a Stipulation of Settlement,
settling claims, subject to court approval, on behalf of the Partnership and all
limited partners who owned units as of November 3, 1999. Preliminary approval of
the settlement was obtained on November 3, 1999 from the Court, at which time
the Court set a final approval hearing for December 10, 1999. Prior to the
December 10, 1999 hearing, the Court received various objections to the
settlement, including a challenge to the Court's preliminary approval based upon
the alleged lack of authority of prior lead counsel to enter the settlement. On
December 14, 1999, the Managing General Partner and its affiliates terminated
the proposed settlement. In February 2000, counsel for some of the named
plaintiffs filed a motion to disqualify plaintiff's lead and liaison counsel who
negotiated the settlement. On June 27, 2000, the Court entered an order
disqualifying them from the case and an appeal was taken from the order on
October 5, 2000. On December 4, 2000, the Court appointed the law firm of Lieff
Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP as new lead counsel for plaintiffs and the
putative class. Plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint on January 19, 2001.
On March 2, 2001, the Managing General Partner and its affiliates filed a
demurrer to the third amended complaint. On May 14, 2001, the Court heard the
demurrer to the third amended complaint. On July 10, 2001, the Court issued an
order sustaining defendants' demurrer on certain grounds. On July 20, 2001,
Plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court's July 10, 2001 order
granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer. On September 7, 2001,
Plaintiffs filed a fourth amended class and derivative action complaint. On
September 12, 2001, the Court denied Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration. On
October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated defendants filed a
demurrer to the fourth amended complaint, which was heard on December 11, 2001.
On February 2, 2002, the Court served its order granting in part the demurrer.
The Court has dismissed without leave to amend certain of the plaintiffs'
claims. On February 11, 2002, plaintiffs filed a motion seeking to certify a
putative class comprised of all non-affiliated persons who own or have owned
units in the partnerships. The Managing General Partner and affiliated
defendants oppose the motion. On April 29, 2002, the Court held a hearing on
plaintiffs' motion for class certification and took the matter under submission
after further briefing, as ordered by the court, was submitted by the parties.
On July 10, 2002, the Court entered an order vacating the current trial date of
January 13, 2003 (as well as the pre-trial and discovery cut-off dates) and
stayed the case in its entirety through November 7, 2002 so that the parties can
have an opportunity to discuss settlement. On October 30, 2002, the court
entered an order extending the stay in effect through January 10, 2003.
During the third quarter of 2001, a complaint (the "Heller action") was filed
against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action, captioned
Heller v. Insignia Financial Group. On or about August 6, 2001, plaintiffs filed
a first amended complaint. The first amended complaint in the Heller action is
brought as a purported derivative action, and asserts claims for among other
things breach of fiduciary duty; unfair competition; conversion, unjust
enrichment; and judicial dissolution. Plaintiffs in the Nuanes action filed a
motion to consolidate the Heller action with the Nuanes action and stated that
the Heller action was filed in order to preserve the derivative claims that were
dismissed without leave to amend in the Nuanes action by the Court order dated
July 10, 2001. On October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated
defendants moved to strike the first amended complaint in its entirety for
violating the Court's July 10, 2001 order granting in part and denying in part
defendants' demurrer in the Nuanes action, or alternatively, to strike certain
portions of the complaint based on the statute of limitations. Other defendants
in the action demurred to the fourth amended complaint, and, alternatively,
moved to strike the complaint. On December 11, 2001, the court heard argument on
the motions and took the matters under submission. On February 4, 2002, the
Court served notice of its order granting defendants' motion to strike the
Heller complaint as a violation of its July 10, 2001 order in the Nuanes action.
On March 27, 2002, the plaintiffs filed a notice appealing the order striking
the complaint. The parties are currently in the midst of briefing that appeal.
The Managing General Partner does not anticipate that any costs, whether legal
or settlement costs, associated with these cases will be material to the
Partnership's overall operations.
The Partnership is unaware of any other pending or outstanding litigation that
is not of a routine nature arising in the ordinary course of business.
ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATION
The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides a "safe harbor"
for forward-looking statements in certain circumstances. The matters discussed
in this report contain certain forward-looking statements, including, without
limitation, statements regarding future financial performance and the effect of
government regulations. The discussions of the Registrant's business and results
of operations, including forward-looking statements pertaining to such matters,
do not take into account the effects of any changes to the Registrant's business
and results of operations. Actual results may differ materially from those
described in the forward-looking statements and will be affected by a variety of
risks and factors including, without limitation: national and local economic
conditions; the terms of governmental regulations that affect the Registrant and
interpretations of those regulations; the competitive environment in which the
Registrant operates; financing risks, including the risk that cash flows from
operations may be insufficient to meet required payments of principal and
interest; real estate risks, including variations of real estate values and the
general economic climate in local markets and competition for tenants in such
markets; and possible environmental liabilities. Readers should carefully review
the Registrant's financial statements and the notes thereto, as well as the risk
factors described in the documents the Registrant files from time to time with
the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Partnership's remaining investment property consists of one business park.
The following table sets forth the average occupancy for the Partnership's
investment property for the nine months ended September 30, 2002 and 2001:
Average Occupancy
Property 2002 2001
Commerce Plaza 70% 70%
Tampa, Florida
Commerce Plaza is actively being marketed for sale. Based on current market
conditions, it is unlikely that the sale of the Partnership's assets will
generate sufficient proceeds to payoff the Nonrecourse Promissory Notes in full.
If the Partnership cannot sell its property for sufficient value, in accordance
with the terms of the forbearance agreement, it is likely that the Partnership
will lose its properties through delivery to an auctioneer.
On October 23, 2001, the Partnership sold Highland Park III to an unaffiliated
third party for net sales proceeds of approximately $3,329,000 after the payment
of closing costs. The Partnership's net sales proceeds were paid to the
indenture trustee to be applied to the amounts due the noteholders.
As of December 31, 1999, the Partnership adopted the liquidation basis of
accounting due to the imminent loss of its investment properties. The
Nonrecourse Promissory Notes had a balance of principal and deferred interest of
approximately $80,000,000 at their maturity date of February 15, 1999. The
Partnership was unable to satisfy the Nonrecourse Promissory Notes at maturity
and as a result, the Partnership was in default on the Nonrecourse Promissory
Notes. The Managing General Partner contacted the indenture trustee for the
Nonrecourse Promissory Notes regarding this default. In connection with these
conversations, on July 30, 1999, the Partnership entered into a forbearance
agreement with the indenture trustee pursuant to which the indenture trustee
agreed not to exercise its rights and remedies under the indenture for up to 390
days. In turn, the Partnership agreed to (a) deliver to the indenture trustee
for the benefit of the noteholders all of the accumulated cash of the
Partnership, less certain reserves and anticipated operating expenses, (b)
market all of its properties for sale, (c) deliver all net cash proceeds from
any sales to the indenture trustee until the notes are fully satisfied and (d)
comply with the reporting requirements under the indenture. At the expiration of
the forbearance period, the Partnership had not sold all of its properties or
satisfied the Nonrecourse Promissory Notes. With the consent of the indenture
trustee, the forbearance period extension is being negotiated to accommodate the
sale of the Partnership's remaining asset, which is currently anticipated to
occur by the end of the first quarter of 2003. Based on current market
conditions, it is unlikely that the sale of the Partnership's remaining asset
will generate sufficient proceeds to pay off the Nonrecourse Promissory Notes in
full. If the Partnership cannot sell the property for sufficient value, in
accordance with the terms of the forbearance agreement, it is likely that the
Partnership will lose its property through delivery to an auctioneer. Upon the
sale or disposal of the last property, the Partnership will terminate.
As a result of the decision to liquidate the Partnership, the Partnership
changed its basis of accounting for its financial statements at December 31,
1999, to the liquidation basis of accounting. Consequently, assets have been
valued at estimated net realizable value and liabilities are presented at their
estimated settlement amounts, including estimated costs associated with carrying
out the liquidation. The valuation of assets and liabilities necessarily
requires many estimates and assumptions and there are substantial uncertainties
in carrying out the liquidation. The actual realization of assets and settlement
of liabilities could be higher or lower than amounts indicated and is based upon
the Managing General Partner's estimates as of the date of the consolidated
financial statements.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2002, net liabilities increased by
approximately $381,000. This increase is primarily due to a decrease in the
estimated costs during the period of liquidation and investment in consolidated
joint venture, partially offset by an increase in the interest payable on the
non-recourse promissory notes. The decrease in the estimated costs during the
period of liquidation is primarily due to the reduced number of months until the
Partnership's expected liquidation. The increase in interest payable is due to
the accrual of nine months of interest on the current principal balance of
approximately $11,847,000.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2001, net liabilities decreased by
approximately $409,000. This decrease is primarily due to increases in the debt
trustee escrow and investment properties and a decrease in other liabilities and
the estimated costs during the period of liquidation offset by decreases in cash
and cash equivalents and receivables and deposits and an increase in interest
payable on the non-recourse promissory note. The increase in debt trustee
escrow, as well as the decreases in cash and cash equivalents and receivables
and deposits, is due to the transfer of excess cash of the Partnership and
previously escrowed sale proceeds, held by a title company, to the debt trustee
per the forbearance agreement. The increase in investment properties is due to
an increase in the estimated fair market value of one of the Partnership's
properties. The decrease in other liabilities is primarily due to the payment of
certain obligations. The increase in interest payable is due to the accrual of
nine months of interest on the outstanding principal balance of approximately
$13,983,000.
The statement of net liabilities in liquidation as of September 30, 2002
includes approximately $677,000 of costs, net of income, that the Managing
General Partner estimates will be incurred during the period of liquidation,
based on the assumption that the liquidation process will be completed by March
31, 2003. Because the success in realization of assets and the settlement of
liabilities is based on the Managing General Partner's best estimates, the
liquidation period may be shorter or extended beyond the projected period.
In light of the maturity of the Notes, no distributions were made to the limited
partners for the nine month periods ended September 30, 2002 and 2001.
The following is a general description of the tax consequences that may result
to a limited partner upon the sale of the Partnership's remaining property. Each
limited partner should consult with his or her own tax advisor to determine his
or her particular tax consequences. The taxable gain and income resulting from
the sale of the Partnership's property will pass through to the limited
partners, and will likely result in income tax liability to the limited partners
without any distribution of cash from the Partnership.
The Managing General Partner monitors developments in the area of legal and
regulatory compliance and is studying new federal laws, including the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 mandates or suggests
additional compliance measures with regard to governance, disclosure, audit and
other areas. In light of these changes, the Partnership expects that it will
incur higher expenses related to compliance, including increased legal and audit
fees. Capital improvements planned for the Partnership's property is detailed
below. Additional capital expenditures will be incurred only if cash is
available from operations.
Commerce Plaza:
During the nine months ended September 30, 2002, the Partnership did not
complete any capital improvements at Commerce Plaza. The Partnership did not
budget capital improvements for 2002 since it anticipated selling this property
in 2002.
In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interest in the
Partnership, AIMCO owned 108 limited partnership units in the Partnership
representing approximately 0.11% of the outstanding units at September 30, 2002.
Affiliates of the Managing General Partner also owned 5,511 limited partnership
units (8.24%) of the Partnership's 1985 Nonrecourse Promissory Notes and 1,635
limited partnership units (9.64%) of the Partnership's 1986 Nonrecourse
Promissory Notes at September 30, 2002. Although the Managing General Partner
owes fiduciary duties to the limited partners of the Partnership, the Managing
General Partner also owed fiduciary duties to AIMCO as its sole stockholder. As
a result, the duties of the Managing General Partner, as managing general
partner, to the Partnership and its limited partners may come into conflict with
the duties of the Managing General Partner to AIMCO, as its sole stockholder.
ITEM 3. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
The principal executive officer and principal financial officer of the Managing
General Partner, who are the equivalent of the Partnership's principal executive
officer and principal financial officer, respectively, have, within 90 days of
the filing date of this quarterly report, evaluated the effectiveness of the
Partnership's disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules (13a-14(c) and (15d-14(c)) and have determined that such disclosure
controls and procedures are adequate. There have been no significant changes in
the Partnership's internal controls or in other factors that could significantly
affect the Partnership's internal controls since the date of evaluation. The
Partnership does not believe any significant deficiencies or material weaknesses
exist in the Partnership's internal controls. Accordingly, no corrective actions
have been taken.
PART II - OTHER INFORMATION
ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
In March 1998, several putative unit holders of limited partnership units of the
Partnership commenced an action entitled Rosalie Nuanes, et al. v. Insignia
Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the
State of California for the County of San Mateo. The plaintiffs named as
defendants, among others, the Partnership, its Managing General Partner and
several of their affiliated partnerships and corporate entities. The action
purports to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and
derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the
Partnership) which are named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other
things, the acquisition of interests in certain Managing General Partner
entities by Insignia Financial Group, Inc. ("Insignia") and entities which were,
at one time, affiliates of Insignia; past tender offers by the Insignia
affiliates to acquire limited partnership units; management of the partnerships
by the Insignia affiliates; and the series of transactions which closed on
October 1, 1998 and February 26, 1999 whereby Insignia and Insignia Properties
Trust, respectively, were merged into AIMCO. The plaintiffs seek monetary
damages and equitable relief, including judicial dissolution of the Partnership.
On June 25, 1998, the Managing General Partner filed a motion seeking dismissal
of the action. In lieu of responding to the motion, the plaintiffs filed an
amended complaint. The Managing General Partner filed demurrers to the amended
complaint which were heard February 1999.
Pending the ruling on such demurrers, settlement negotiations commenced. On
November 2, 1999, the parties executed and filed a Stipulation of Settlement,
settling claims, subject to court approval, on behalf of the Partnership and all
limited partners who owned units as of November 3, 1999. Preliminary approval of
the settlement was obtained on November 3, 1999 from the Court, at which time
the Court set a final approval hearing for December 10, 1999. Prior to the
December 10, 1999 hearing, the Court received various objections to the
settlement, including a challenge to the Court's preliminary approval based upon
the alleged lack of authority of prior lead counsel to enter the settlement. On
December 14, 1999, the Managing General Partner and its affiliates terminated
the proposed settlement. In February 2000, counsel for some of the named
plaintiffs filed a motion to disqualify plaintiff's lead and liaison counsel who
negotiated the settlement. On June 27, 2000, the Court entered an order
disqualifying them from the case and an appeal was taken from the order on
October 5, 2000. On December 4, 2000, the Court appointed the law firm of Lieff
Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP as new lead counsel for plaintiffs and the
putative class. Plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint on January 19, 2001.
On March 2, 2001, the Managing General Partner and its affiliates filed a
demurrer to the third amended complaint. On May 14, 2001, the Court heard the
demurrer to the third amended complaint. On July 10, 2001, the Court issued an
order sustaining defendants' demurrer on certain grounds. On July 20, 2001,
Plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court's July 10, 2001 order
granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer. On September 7, 2001,
Plaintiffs filed a fourth amended class and derivative action complaint. On
September 12, 2001, the Court denied Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration. On
October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated defendants filed a
demurrer to the fourth amended complaint, which was heard on December 11, 2001.
On February 2, 2002, the Court served its order granting in part the demurrer.
The Court has dismissed without leave to amend certain of the plaintiffs'
claims. On February 11, 2002, plaintiffs filed a motion seeking to certify a
putative class comprised of all non-affiliated persons who own or have owned
units in the partnerships. The Managing General Partner and affiliated
defendants oppose the motion. On April 29, 2002, the Court held a hearing on
plaintiffs' motion for class certification and took the matter under submission
after further briefing, as ordered by the court, was submitted by the parties.
On July 10, 2002, the Court entered an order vacating the current trial date of
January 13, 2003 (as well as the pre-trial and discovery cut-off dates) and
stayed the case in its entirety through November 7, 2002 so that the parties can
have an opportunity to discuss settlement. On October 30, 2002, the court
entered an order extending the stay in effect through January 10, 2003.
During the third quarter of 2001, a complaint (the "Heller action") was filed
against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action, captioned
Heller v. Insignia Financial Group. On or about August 6, 2001, plaintiffs filed
a first amended complaint. The first amended complaint in the Heller action is
brought as a purported derivative action, and asserts claims for among other
things breach of fiduciary duty; unfair competition; conversion, unjust
enrichment; and judicial dissolution. Plaintiffs in the Nuanes action filed a
motion to consolidate the Heller action with the Nuanes action and stated that
the Heller action was filed in order to preserve the derivative claims that were
dismissed without leave to amend in the Nuanes action by the Court order dated
July 10, 2001. On October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated
defendants moved to strike the first amended complaint in its entirety for
violating the Court's July 10, 2001 order granting in part and denying in part
defendants' demurrer in the Nuanes action, or alternatively, to strike certain
portions of the complaint based on the statute of limitations. Other defendants
in the action demurred to the fourth amended complaint, and, alternatively,
moved to strike the complaint. On December 11, 2001, the court heard argument on
the motions and took the matters under submission. On February 4, 2002, the
Court served notice of its order granting defendants' motion to strike the
Heller complaint as a violation of its July 10, 2001 order in the Nuanes action.
On March 27, 2002, the plaintiffs filed a notice appealing the order striking
the complaint. The parties are currently in the midst of briefing that appeal.
The Managing General Partner does not anticipate that any costs, whether legal
or settlement costs, associated with these cases will be material to the
Partnership's overall operations.
ITEM 2. EXHIBITS AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K
a) Exhibits:
Exhibit 3, Agreement of Limited Partnership, incorporated by
reference to Exhibit A to the Prospectus of the Partnership
dated July 1, 1985 and thereafter supplemented, contained in
the Partnership's Registration Statement on Form S-11 (Reg.
No. 2-96389).
Exhibit 99, Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer.
b) Reports on Form 8-K:
None filed during the quarter ended September 30, 2002.
SIGNATURES
In accordance with the requirements of the Exchange Act, the Registrant caused
this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly
authorized.
CENTURY PENSION INCOME FUND XXIII
By: FOX PARTNERS V
Its General Partner
By: FOX CAPITAL MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
Its Managing General Partner
By: /s/Patrick J. Foye
Patrick J. Foye
Executive Vice President
By: /s/Thomas C. Novosel
Thomas C. Novosel
Senior Vice President
and Chief Accounting Officer
Date: November 13, 2002
CERTIFICATION
I, Patrick J. Foye, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Century Properties
Income Fund XXIII;
2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;
4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:
a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is
being prepared;
b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
c) Presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;
5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and
b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
controls; and
6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.
Date: November 13, 2002
_______________________
Patrick J. Foye
Executive Vice President of Fox Capital
Management Corporation, equivalent of the
chief executive officer of the Partnership
CERTIFICATION
I, Paul J. McAuliffe, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Century Properties
Income Fund XXIII;
2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;
4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:
a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is
being prepared;
b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
c) Presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;
5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and
b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
controls; and
6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.
Date: November 13, 2002
_______________________
Paul J. McAuliffe
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer of Fox Capital Management Corporation,
equivalent of the chief financial officer of
the Partnership
Exhibit 99
Certification of CEO and CFO
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
As Adopted Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Century Properties
Income Fund XXIII (the "Partnership"), for the quarterly period ended September
30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), Patrick J. Foye, as the equivalent of the chief executive
officer of the Partnership, and Paul J. McAuliffe, as the equivalent of the
chief financial officer of the Partnership, each hereby certifies, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:
(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Partnership.
/s/ Patrick J. Foye
Name: Patrick J. Foye
Date: November 13, 2002
/s/ Paul J. McAuliffe
Name: Paul J. McAuliffe
Date: November 13, 2002
This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Partnership for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.