UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-QSB
(Mark One)
[X] QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934
For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2003
[ ] TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from _________to _________
Commission file number 0-13408
CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XX
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
California 94-2930770
(State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer
incorporation or organization) Identification No.)
55 Beattie Place, PO 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 PROPERTIES FUND XX
STATEMENT OF NET LIABILITIES IN LIQUIDATION
(unaudited)
(in thousands)
June 30, 2003
Assets
Cash and cash equivalents $ 20
Receivables and deposits 13
Debt trustee escrow 809
842
Liabilities
Other liabilities 61
Non-recourse promissory notes (Note A) 1,693
Estimated costs during the period of liquidation 98
1,852
Net liabilities in liquidation $(1,010)
See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements
CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XX
STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN NET LIABILITIES IN LIQUIDATION
(Unaudited)
(in thousands)
For the Six Months
Ended June 30,
2003 2002
Net liabilities in liquidation at beginning of period $ (950) $ (775)
Changes in net liabilities in liquidation attributed to:
Decrease in cash and cash equivalents (26) (492)
Increase in debt trustee escrow 2 383
Decrease in other liabilities 23 1
Increase in Non-Recourse Promissory Notes and interest (36) (39)
(Increase) decrease in estimated costs during the
period of liquidation (23) 94
Net liabilities in liquidation at end of period $(1,010) $ (828)
See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements
CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XX
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
Note A - Basis of Presentation
As of December 31, 1999, Century Properties Fund XX (the "Partnership" or
"Registrant") adopted the liquidation basis of accounting.
The Partnership's Nonrecourse Promissory Notes (the "Notes"), which had a
balance of principal and accrued interest of approximately $1,693,000 at June
30, 2003, matured on November 30, 1998. The Partnership was in default due to
non-payment upon maturity. Fox Capital Management Corporation ("FCMC" or the
"Managing General Partner"), the general partner of the Partnership's general
partner, previously contacted the indenture trustee for the Notes and certain
holders of the Notes regarding this default. On October 28, 1999, the
Partnership entered into a forbearance agreement with the indenture trustee for
a period of 390 days. In turn, the Partnership agreed to (a) deliver to the
indenture trustee for the benefit of the note holders 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 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 Notes. With the consent of the indenture
trustee, the forbearance period was extended to December 15, 2001. The sale of
the Partnership's remaining asset in October 2001 did not generate sufficient
proceeds to pay off the Notes in full. The Managing General Partner is working
with the debt trustee regarding a final payment to the noteholders. Once this
payment is made, the Partnership is expected to terminate. The Managing General
Partner is a subsidiary of Apartment Investment and Management Company
("AIMCO"), a publicly traded real estate investment trust.
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. 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
financial statements.
Included in other liabilities in the statement of net liabilities in liquidation
as of June 30, 2003 is approximately $98,000 of costs that the Managing General
Partner estimates will be incurred during the remaining period of liquidation
based on the assumption that the liquidation process will be completed by
December 31, 2003. Because 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.
Affiliates of the Managing General Partner received reimbursement of accountable
administrative expenses amounting to approximately $20,000 for the six months
ended June 30, 2002. No such reimbursements were charged during the six months
ended June 30, 2003.
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
purported to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and
derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the
Partnership) that 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 that 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 sought 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 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 opposed 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 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 could 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 Heller action was brought as a purported
derivative action, and asserted 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. Before completing
briefing on the appeal, the parties stayed further proceedings in the appeal in
light of a settlement.
On January 8, 2003, the parties filed a Stipulation of Settlement in proposed
settlement of the Nuanes action and the Heller action.
On June 13,2003, the Court granted final approval of the settlement and entered
judgement in both the Nuanes and Heller actions. While the Nuanes and Heller
actions have been dismissed the settlement only benefits limited partners as of
December 20, 2002 in those limited partnerships named in the complaint that are
not in the process of being liquidated or that have already been liquidated. The
Partnership's limited partners will not be entitled to any proceeds from the
settlement since the Partnership is in the process of being liquidated, but have
not compromised any potential claims as a result of the settlement and
dismissal. The Partnership's limited partners should have received a Notice to
Non-Settling Persons during April 2003 which describes this information in more
detail.
The Managing General Partner does not anticipate that any costs to the
Partnership, 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 OPERATIONS
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. 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; litigation, including costs associated with
prosecuting and defending claims and any adverse outcomes, and financing risks,
including the risk that cash flows from operations may be insufficient to meet
required payments of principal and interest. 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.
As of December 31, 1999, Century Properties Fund XX (the "Partnership" or
"Registrant") adopted the liquidation basis of accounting due to the imminent
loss of its remaining investment properties. The Partnership's Nonrecourse
Promissory Notes (the "Notes"), which had a balance of principal and accrued
interest of approximately $1,693,000 at June 30, 2003, matured on November 30,
1998. The Partnership was in default due to non-payment upon maturity. The
Managing General Partner had previously contacted the indenture trustee and
entered a forbearance agreement on October 28, 1999. In turn, the Partnership
agreed to (a) deliver to the indenture trustee for the benefit of the note
holders 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 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 Notes. With the consent of the
indenture trustee, the forbearance period was extended to December 15, 2001. The
sale of the Partnership's remaining asset in October 2001 did not generate
sufficient proceeds to pay off the Notes in full. The Managing General Partner
is working with the debt trustee regarding a final payment to the noteholders.
Once this payment is made, 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. 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
financial statements.
During the six months ended June 30, 2003, net liabilities increased by
approximately $60,000. This increase is primarily due to an increase in the
accrued interest payable on the non-recourse promissory notes and in the
estimated costs during the period of liquidation partially offset by a decrease
in other liabilities. The increase in the estimated costs during the period of
liquidation is due to an increase in the estimate for the annual audit.
During the six months ended June 30, 2002, net liabilities increased by
approximately $53,000. This increase is primarily due to decreases in cash and
cash equivalents and estimated costs during the period of liquidation partially
offset by an increase in the debt trustee escrow. The increase in the debt
trustee escrow as well as the decrease in cash and cash equivalents is primarily
due to the transfer of excess cash from the Partnership to the debt trustee. The
decrease in the estimated costs during the period of liquidation is primarily
due to three less months until liquidation.
Included in other liabilities in the statement of net liabilities in liquidation
as of June 30, 2003 is approximately $98,000 of costs 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 December 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.
In light of the maturity of the Notes, no distributions were made to the limited
partners for the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2002.
In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interest in the
Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 3,950 limited partnership units in
the Partnership representing 6.39% of the outstanding units at June 30, 2003.
AIMCO and its affiliates also own 8,969 of the notes representing 9.09% of the
outstanding notes at June 30, 2003.
ITEM 3. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
(a) Disclosure Controls and Procedures. The Partnership's management, with the
participation of 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, has
evaluated the effectiveness of the Partnership's disclosure controls and
procedures (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act")) as of the end
of the period covered by this report. Based on such evaluation, 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 concluded that, as of the
end of such period, the Partnership's disclosure controls and procedures are
effective.
(b) Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. There have not been any changes
in the Partnership's internal control over financial reporting (as such term is
defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the
fiscal quarter to which this report relates that have materially affected, or
are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Partnership's internal control
over financial reporting.
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
purported to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and
derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the
Partnership) that 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 that 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 sought 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 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 opposed 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 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 could 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 Heller action was brought as a purported
derivative action, and asserted 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. Before completing
briefing on the appeal, the parties stayed further proceedings in the appeal in
light of a settlement.
On January 8, 2003, the parties filed a Stipulation of Settlement in proposed
settlement of the Nuanes action and the Heller action.
On June 13,2003, the Court granted final approval of the settlement and entered
judgement in both the Nuanes and Heller actions. While the Nuanes and Heller
actions have been dismissed the settlement only benefits limited partners as of
December 20, 2002 in those limited partnerships named in the complaint that are
not in the process of being liquidated or that have already been liquidated. The
Partnership's limited partners will not be entitled to any proceeds from the
settlement since the Partnership is in the process of being liquidated, but have
not compromised any potential claims as a result of the settlement and
dismissal. The Partnership's limited partners should have received a Notice to
Non-Settling Persons during April 2003 which describes this information in more
detail.
The Managing General Partner does not anticipate that any costs to the
Partnership, whether legal or settlement costs, associated with these cases will
be material to the Partnership's overall operations.
ITEM 6. 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 February 22, 1984, and November 8, 1984, and thereafter
supplemented, contained in the Partnership's Registration
Statement on Form S-11 (Reg. No. 2-88615).
Exhibit 31.1, Certification of equivalent of Chief Executive
Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules
13a-14(a)/15d-14(a), as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
Exhibit 31.2, Certification of equivalent of Chief Financial
Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules
13a-14(a)/15d-14(a), as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
Exhibit 32.1, Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.
b) Reports on Form 8-K:
None filed during the quarter ended June 30, 2003.
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 PROPERTIES FUND XX
By: FOX PARTNERS III
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: August 13, 2003
Exhibit 31.1
CERTIFICATION
I, Patrick J. Foye, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Century Properties
Fund XX;
2. Based on my knowledge, this 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
report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this 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 report;
4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant
and have:
(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, 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 report is being prepared;
(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about
the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of
the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; and
(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth
fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's
internal control over financial reporting.
Date: August 13, 2003
/s/Patrick J. Foye
Patrick J. Foye
Executive Vice President of Fox Capital
Management Corporation, equivalent of the
chief executive officer of the Partnership
Exhibit 31.2
CERTIFICATION
I, Paul J. McAuliffe, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Century Properties
Fund XX;
2. Based on my knowledge, this 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
report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this 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 report;
4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant
and have:
(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, 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 report is being prepared;
(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about
the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of
the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; and
(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth
fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's
internal control over financial reporting.
Date: August 13, 2003
/s/Paul J. McAuliffe
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 32.1
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
Fund XX (the "Partnership"), for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2003 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: August 13, 2003
/s/Paul J. McAuliffe
Name: Paul J. McAuliffe
Date: August 13, 2003
This certification is furnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.