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 0-14099
CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES VI
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
California 94-2940204
(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
CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES VI
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
(Unaudited)
(in thousands, except unit data)
June 30, 2003
Assets
Cash and cash equivalents $ 119
Receivables and deposits 29
Other assets 136
Investment property:
Land $ 916
Buildings and related personal property 10,459
11,375
Less accumulated depreciation (5,893) 5,482
$ 5,766
Liabilities and Partners' (Deficiency) Capital
Liabilities
Accounts payable $ 26
Tenant security deposit liabilities 84
Accrued property taxes 72
Other liabilities 116
Due to affiliates 17
Mortgage note payable 5,118
Partners' (Deficiency) Capital
General partner $ (2)
Special limited partners (73)
Limited partners (181,300 units issued and
outstanding) 408 333
$ 5,766
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES VI
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
(in thousands, except per unit data)
Three Months Six Months
Ended June 30, Ended June 30,
2003 2002 2003 2002
Revenues:
Rental income $ 405 $ 443 $ 817 $ 867
Other income 64 62 124 107
Casualty gain (Note C) -- 18 -- 18
Total revenues 469 523 941 992
Expenses:
Operating 197 197 402 371
General and administrative 25 37 51 80
Depreciation 121 114 240 225
Interest 102 107 205 214
Property taxes 39 38 78 68
Total expenses 484 493 976 958
Net (loss) income $ (15) $ 30 $ (35) $ 34
Net (loss) income allocated to
general partner (0.2%) $ -- $ -- $ -- $ --
Net (loss) income allocated to
limited partners (99.8%) (15) 30 (35) 34
$ (15) $ 30 $ (35) $ 34
Net (loss) income per limited
partnership unit $ (0.08) $ 0.17 $ (0.19) $ 0.19
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES VI
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' (DEFICIENCY) CAPITAL
(Unaudited)
(in thousands, except unit data)
Limited Special
Partnership General Limited Limited
Units Partner Partners Partners Total
Original capital contributions 181,808 $ 1 $ -- $45,452 $45,453
Partners' (deficiency) capital
at December 31, 2002 181,300 $ (2) $ (73) $ 443 $ 368
Net loss for the six months
ended June 30, 2003 -- -- -- (35) (35)
Partners' (deficiency) capital
at June 30, 2003 181,300 $ (2) $ (73) $ 408 $ 333
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES VI
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
(in thousands)
Six Months Ended
June 30,
2003 2002
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net (loss) income $ (35) $ 34
Adjustments to reconcile net (loss) income to net
cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation 240 225
Amortization of loan costs 3 3
Casualty gain -- (18)
Change in accounts:
Receivables and deposits (4) 13
Other assets (24) (18)
Accounts payable (13) (75)
Tenant security deposit liabilities 9 8
Accrued property taxes (63) (63)
Other liabilities 6 59
Due to affiliates 17 23
Net cash provided by operating activities 136 191
Cash flows from investing activities:
Property improvements and replacements (119) (201)
Insurance proceeds received -- 19
Net cash used in investing activities (119) (182)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Payments on mortgage note payable (76) (70)
Advances from affiliates -- 98
Payments on advances from affiliates -- (184)
Net cash used in financing activities (76) (156)
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents (59) (147)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period 178 240
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $ 119 $ 93
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
Cash paid for interest $ 201 $ 211
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES VI
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
Note A - Basis of Presentation
The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements of Consolidated
Capital Properties VI (the "Partnership" or "Registrant") have been prepared in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for interim financial
information and with the instructions to Form 10-QSB and Item 310(b) of
Regulation S-B. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and
footnotes required by generally accepted accounting principles for complete
financial statements. In the opinion of ConCap Equities, Inc. ("CEI" or the
"General Partner"), all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring accruals)
considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Operating
results for the three and six months ended June 30, 2003, are not necessarily
indicative of the results that may be expected for the fiscal year ending
December 31, 2003. For further information, refer to the consolidated financial
statements and footnotes thereto included in the Partnership's Annual Report on
Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002. The General Partner is
an affiliate of Apartment Investment and Management Company ("AIMCO"), a
publicly traded real estate investment trust.
Note B - Related Party Transactions
The Partnership has no employees and is dependent on the General Partner and its
affiliates for the management and administration of all Partnership activities.
The Partnership Agreement provides for payments to affiliates for services and
the reimbursement of certain expenses incurred by affiliates on behalf of the
Partnership.
Affiliates of the General Partner are entitled to receive 5% of gross receipts
from the Partnership's property as compensation for providing property
management services. The Partnership paid such affiliates approximately $48,000
and $58,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2002, respectively, which
is included in operating expenses.
An affiliate of the General Partner earned reimbursement of accountable
administrative expenses amounting to approximately $25,000 and $63,000 for the
six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2002, respectively, which is included in
general and administrative expenses. Approximately $17,000 of the fees for 2003
remained unpaid as of June 30, 2003.
The Partnership Agreement also provides for a special management fee equal to 9%
of the total distributions made from operations to the Limited Partners to be
paid to the General Partner for executive and administrative management
services. No such fee was earned for the six months ended June 30, 2003 or 2002.
The Partnership had advances from an affiliate of the General Partner of
approximately $139,000 as of December 31, 2001. During the six months ended June
30, 2002, the Partnership received additional advances from an affiliate of the
General Partner of approximately $98,000 and repaid approximately $188,000 of
these advances including approximately $4,000 in accrued interest. The balance
of this advance was repaid during the remainder of 2002. Interest was charged at
the prime rate plus 2% and amounted to approximately $3,000 for the six months
ended June 30, 2002. There were no loans from the General Partner or associated
interest expense during the six months ended June 30, 2003.
The Partnership insures 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 General
Partner. During the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2002, the Partnership was
charged by AIMCO and its affiliates approximately $21,000 and $25,000,
respectively, for insurance coverage and fees associated with policy claims
administration.
Note C - Casualty Gain
The casualty gain is related to a fire at the property in August 2001. A gain of
approximately $43,000 was recognized during the year ended December 31, 2001. An
additional gain of approximately $18,000 was recognized during the six months
ended June 30, 2002 due to the receipt of additional insurance proceeds of
approximately $19,000, net of the write off of additional undepreciated property
improvements and replacements of approximately $1,000.
Note D - 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 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 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 General Partner filed a
motion seeking dismissal of the action. In lieu of responding to the motion, the
plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The 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 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 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
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
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 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 described below.
In general terms, the proposed settlement provides for certification for
settlement purposes of a settlement class consisting of all limited partners in
this Partnership and others (the "Partnerships") as of December 20, 2002, the
dismissal with prejudice and release of claims in the Nuanes and Heller
litigation, payment by AIMCO of $9.9 million (which shall be distributed to
settlement class members after deduction of attorney fees and costs of class
counsel and certain costs of settlement) and up to $1 million toward the cost of
independent appraisals of the Partnerships' properties by a Court appointed
appraiser. An affiliate of the General Partner has also agreed to make a tender
offer to purchase all of the partnership interests in the Partnerships within
one year of final approval, if it is granted, and to provide partners with the
independent appraisals at the time of these tenders. The proposed settlement
also provided for the limitation of the allowable costs which the General
Partner or its affiliates will charge the Partnerships in connection with this
litigation and imposes limits on the class counsel fees and costs in this
litigation. On April 11, 2003, notice was distributed to limited partners
providing the details of the proposed settlement.
On June 13, 2003, the Court granted final approval of the settlement and entered
judgment in both the Nuanes and Heller actions.
The 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; 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; litigation, including costs associated with prosecuting and
defending claims and any adverse outcomes 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 investment property consists of one apartment complex, Colony
of Springdale Apartments, located in Springdale, Ohio. The average occupancy for
the six month periods ended June 30, 2003 and 2002, was 90% and 95%,
respectively. The decrease in occupancy at Colony of Springdale Apartments is
due to competitive market conditions and unfavorable economic conditions in the
local market area.
Results of Operations
The Partnership's net loss for the six months ended June 30, 2003 was
approximately $35,000 compared to net income of approximately $34,000 for the
corresponding period in 2002. The Partnership's net loss for the three months
ended June 30, 2003 was approximately $15,000 compared to net income of
approximately $30,000 for the corresponding period in 2002. Net income decreased
for the six months ended June 30, 2003 as compared to the same period in 2002 as
a result of a decrease in total revenues and an increase in total expenses. Net
income decreased for the three months ended June 30, 2003 as compared to the
same period in 2002 as a result of a decrease in total revenues.
The decrease in total revenues for the three and six months ended June 30, 2003
is attributable to a decrease in rental revenue and a casualty gain recognized
during the six months ended June 30, 2002 (as discussed below) partially offset
by an increase in other income. During the three months ended June 30, 2003
other income remained relatively constant. Rental revenue decreased primarily
due to a decrease in occupancy at Colony of Springdale Apartments (as discussed
above). Other income increased for the six months ended June 30, 2003 due to an
increase in net utility reimbursements, late charges, and lease cancellation
fees.
The casualty gain is related to a fire at the property in August 2001. A gain of
approximately $43,000 was recognized during the year ended December 31, 2001. An
additional gain of approximately $18,000 was recognized during the six months
ended June 30, 2002 due to the receipt of additional insurance proceeds of
approximately $19,000, net of the write off of additional undepreciated property
improvements and replacements of approximately $1,000. No such gains were
recognized during the six months ended June 30, 2003.
Total expenses increased for the six months ended June 30, 2003 primarily due to
an increase in operating and depreciation expenses partially offset by a
decrease in general and administrative expenses. Total expenses decreased for
the three months ended June 30, 2003 as increases in operating and depreciation
expenses were more than offset by a decrease in general and administrative
expenses. Operating expenses increased due to an increase in maintenance and
property expenses partially offset by a decrease in management fees. Maintenance
expenses increased primarily due to an increase in contract services and snow
removal expenses at the Partnership's property. Property expenses increased
primarily due to an increase in utility expenses partially offset by a decrease
in employee salaries and related benefits and reduced commissions and bonuses.
Management fees decreased due to decreased rental revenues at the Partnership's
property. Depreciation expense increased due to property improvements and
replacements completed during the twelve month period ended June 30, 2003 that
are now being depreciated.
General and administrative expenses decreased for the three and six months ended
June 30, 2003 primarily due to a decrease in the cost of services included in
the management reimbursements to the General Partner as allowed under the
Partnership Agreement. Also included in general and administrative expenses at
June 30, 2003 are costs associated with the quarterly and annual communications
with investors and regulatory agencies and the annual audit required by the
Partnership Agreement.
As part of the ongoing business plan of the Partnership, the General Partner
monitors the rental market environment of its investment property to assess the
feasibility of increasing rents, maintaining or increasing occupancy levels and
protecting the Partnership from increases in expenses. As part of this plan, the
General Partner attempts to protect the Partnership from the burden of
inflation-related increases in expenses by increasing rents and maintaining a
high overall occupancy level. However, due to changing market conditions, which
can result in the use of rental concessions and rental reductions to offset
softening market conditions, there is no guarantee that the General Partner will
be able to sustain such a plan.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
At June 30, 2003, the Partnership had cash and cash equivalents of approximately
$119,000 compared to approximately $93,000 at June 30, 2002. Cash and cash
equivalents decreased by approximately $59,000 since December 31, 2002 due to
approximately $119,000 and $76,000 of cash used in investing and financing
activities, respectively, partially offset by approximately $136,000 of cash
provided by operating activities. Cash used in investing activities consisted of
property improvements and replacements. Cash used in financing activities
consisted of principal payments made on the mortgage encumbering the
Partnership's property. The Partnership invests its working capital reserves in
interest bearing accounts.
The sufficiency of existing liquid assets to meet future liquidity and capital
expenditure requirements is directly related to the level of capital
expenditures required at the property to adequately maintain the physical assets
and other operating needs of the Partnership and to comply with Federal, state,
and local legal and regulatory requirements. The 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 are discussed below.
During the six months ended June 30, 2003, the Partnership completed
approximately $119,000 of capital expenditures at Colony of Springdale
Apartments, consisting primarily of structural improvements, parking area
improvements, roofing, gutter, and floor covering replacements. These
improvements were funded from operating cash flow. The Partnership evaluates the
capital improvement needs of the property during the year and currently expects
to complete an additional $26,000 in capital improvements during 2003. The
additional capital improvements will consist of floor covering, HVAC and
appliance replacements and concrete work. Additional improvements may be
considered and will depend on the physical condition of the property as well as
the anticipated cash flow generated by the property and Partnership reserves.
The Partnership's assets are thought to be sufficient for any near-term needs
(exclusive of capital improvements) of the Partnership. The mortgage
indebtedness of approximately $5,118,000 matures December 1, 2019 at which time
the mortgage is scheduled to be fully amortized.
The Partnership did not make any distributions during the six months ended June
30, 2003 and 2002. Future cash distributions will depend on the levels of net
cash generated from operations, the availability of cash reserves and the timing
of the debt maturity, refinancing and/or property sale. The Partnership's cash
available for distribution is reviewed on a monthly basis. There can be no
assurance that the Partnership will generate sufficient funds from operations,
after required capital expenditures, to permit distributions to its partners
during the remainder of 2003 or subsequent periods.
Other
In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interests in the
Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 91,747 limited partnership units
(the "Units") in the Partnership representing 50.61% of the outstanding Units at
June 30, 2003. A number of these Units were acquired pursuant to tender offers
made by AIMCO or its affiliates. It is possible that AIMCO or its affiliates
will acquire additional Units in exchange for cash or a combination of cash and
units in the operating partnership of AIMCO either through private purchases or
tender offers. Pursuant to the Partnership Agreement, unitholders holding a
majority of the Units are entitled to take action with respect to a variety of
matters that include, but are not limited to, voting on certain amendments to
the Partnership Agreement and voting to remove the General Partner. As a result
of its ownership of 50.61% of the outstanding Units, AIMCO and its affiliates
are in a position to control all voting decisions with respect to the
Partnership. Although the General Partner owes fiduciary duties to the limited
partners of the Partnership, the General Partner also owes fiduciary duties to
AIMCO as its sole stockholder. As a result, the duties of the General Partner,
as general partner, to the Partnership and its limited partners may come into
conflict with the duties of the General Partner to AIMCO, as its sole
stockholder.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
The consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States which require the Partnership
to make estimates and assumptions. The Partnership believes that of its
significant accounting policies, the following may involve a higher degree of
judgment and complexity.
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets
The investment property is recorded at cost, less accumulated depreciation,
unless considered impaired. If events or circumstances indicate that the
carrying amount of a property may be impaired, the Partnership will make an
assessment of its recoverability by estimating the undiscounted future cash
flows, excluding interest charges, of the property. If the carrying amount
exceeds the aggregate future cash flows, the Partnership would recognize an
impairment loss to the extent the carrying amount exceeds the fair value of the
property.
Real property investments are subject to varying degrees of risk. Several
factors may adversely affect the economic performance and value of the
Partnership's investment property. These factors include changes in the
national, regional and local economic climate; local conditions, such as an
oversupply of multifamily properties; competition from other available
multifamily property owners and changes in market rental rates. Any adverse
changes in these factors could cause an impairment in the Partnership's assets.
Revenue Recognition
The Partnership generally leases apartment units for twelve-month terms or less.
Rental income attributable to leases is recognized monthly as it is earned and
the Partnership fully reserves all outstanding balances over thirty days. The
Partnership will offer rental concessions during particularly slow months or in
response to heavy competition from other similar complexes in the area. Any
concessions given at the inception of the lease are amortized over the life of
the lease.
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 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 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 General Partner filed a
motion seeking dismissal of the action. In lieu of responding to the motion, the
plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The 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 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 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
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
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 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 described below.
In general terms, the proposed settlement provides for certification for
settlement purposes of a settlement class consisting of all limited partners in
this Partnership and others (the "Partnerships") as of December 20, 2002, the
dismissal with prejudice and release of claims in the Nuanes and Heller
litigation, payment by AIMCO of $9.9 million (which shall be distributed to
settlement class members after deduction of attorney fees and costs of class
counsel and certain costs of settlement) and up to $1 million toward the cost of
independent appraisals of the Partnerships' properties by a Court appointed
appraiser. An affiliate of the General Partner has also agreed to make a tender
offer to purchase all of the partnership interests in the Partnerships within
one year of final approval, if it is granted, and to provide partners with the
independent appraisals at the time of these tenders. The proposed settlement
also provided for the limitation of the allowable costs which the General
Partner or its affiliates will charge the Partnerships in connection with this
litigation and imposes limits on the class counsel fees and costs in this
litigation. On April 11, 2003, notice was distributed to limited partners
providing the details of the proposed settlement.
On June 13, 2003, the Court granted final approval of the settlement and entered
judgment in both the Nuanes and Heller actions.
The 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:
3.1 Certificate of Limited Partnership, incorporated by reference
to the Registration Statement of Registrant filed October 22,
1984, as amended to date.
3.2 Agreement of Limited Partnership, incorporated by reference to
the Registration Statement of Registrant filed October 22,
1984, as amended to date.
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.
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.
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.
CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES VI
By: CONCAP EQUITIES, INC.
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 Consolidated
Capital Properties VI;
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 ConCap Equities,
Inc., 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 Consolidated
Capital Properties VI;
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 ConCap Equities, Inc., 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 Consolidated Capital
Properties VI (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.