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 March 31, 2005
[ ] TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT
For the transition period from _________to _________
Commission file number 0-16684
MULTI-BENEFIT REALTY FUND '87-1
(Exact name of small business issuer as specified in its charter)
California 94-3026785
(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)
Check whether the issuer (i) filed all reports required to be filed by
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the past 12 months (or for
such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports)
and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past
90 days. Yes X No __
PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION
ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MULTI-BENEFIT REALTY FUND '87-1
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
(Unaudited)
(in thousands, except unit data)
March 31, 2005
Assets
Cash and cash equivalents $ 8
Receivables and deposits 144
Other assets 186
Investment property:
Land $ 485
Buildings and related personal property 7,843
8,328
Less accumulated depreciation (6,111) 2,217
$ 2,555
Liabilities and Partners' (Deficiency) Capital
Liabilities
Accounts payable $ 174
Tenant security deposit liabilities 32
Accrued property taxes 36
Other liabilities 314
Due to affiliates (Note B) 135
Mortgage note payable 3,473
Partners' (Deficiency) Capital
General Partner $ (80)
Limited Partner "A" Unit holders -
96,284 units issued and outstanding (8,454)
Limited Partner "B" Unit holders -
75,152 units issued and outstanding 6,925 (1,609)
$ 2,555
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
MULTI-BENEFIT REALTY FUND '87-1
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
(in thousands, except per unit data)
Three Months Ended
March 31,
2005 2004
Revenues:
Rental income $ 326 $ 309
Other income 30 54
Total revenues 356 363
Expenses:
Operating 263 205
General and administrative 20 28
Depreciation 98 97
Interest 75 75
Property taxes (Note C) 36 39
Total expenses 492 444
Net loss $ (136) $ (81)
Net loss allocated to general partner (1%) $ (1) $ (1)
Net loss allocated to limited partners (99%) (135) (80)
$ (136) $ (81)
Net loss per limited partnership "A" and "B" units $(0.79) $(0.47)
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
MULTI-BENEFIT REALTY FUND '87-1
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' (DEFICIENCY) CAPITAL
(Unaudited)
(in thousands, except unit data)
Total
Partners'
General Limited Partners (Deficiency)
Partner "A" Units "B" Units Capital
Original capital contributions $ 1 $ 9,706 $ 7,538 $ 17,245
Limited partnership units at
December 31, 2004 and
March 31, 2005 -- 96,284 75,152 171,436
Partners' (deficiency) capital
at December 31, 2004 $ (79) $(8,378) $ 6,984 $ (1,473)
Net loss for the three months
ended March 31, 2005 (1) (76) (59) (136)
Partners' (deficiency) capital
at March 31, 2005 $ (80) $(8,454) $ 6,925 $ (1,609)
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
MULTI-BENEFIT REALTY FUND '87-1
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
(in thousands)
Three Months Ended
March 31,
2005 2004
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net loss $ (136) $ (81)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided
by operating activities:
Depreciation 98 97
Amortization of loan costs 3 3
Change in accounts:
Receivables and deposits (17) (71)
Other assets (22) (13)
Accounts payable 81 54
Tenant security deposit liabilities 1 (5)
Accrued property taxes (108) 41
Other liabilities 133 26
Due to affiliates 13 --
Net cash provided by operating activities 46 51
Cash flows used in investing activities:
Property improvements and replacements (26) (8)
Cash flows used in financing activities:
Payments on mortgage note payable (28) (26)
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents (8) 17
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period 16 303
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $ 8 $ 320
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
Cash paid for interest $ 70 $ 72
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash activity:
Property improvements and replacements included in
accounts payable $ 33 $ --
At December 31, 2004, there were $9,000 of property improvements and
replacements included in accounts payable.
See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
MULTI-BENEFIT REALTY FUND '87-1
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
Note A - Basis of Presentation
The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements of Multi-Benefit
Realty Fund '87-1 (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. (the "General
Partner"), all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring accruals) considered
necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Operating results for the
three month period ended March 31, 2005, are not necessarily indicative of the
results that may be expected for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2005. 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, 2004. The General Partner is an affiliate of
Apartment Investment and Management Company ("AIMCO"), a publicly traded real
estate investment trust.
Limited Partnership Units
The Partnership has issued two classes of Units of Depositary Receipts
("Units"), "A" Units and "B" Units. The two classes of Units are entitled to
different rights and priorities as to cash distributions and Partnership
allocations. The Units represent economic rights attributable to the limited
partnership interests in the Partnership and entitle the holders thereof ("Unit
holders") to participate in certain allocations and distributions of the
Partnership.
Note B - Transactions with Affiliated Parties
The Partnership has no employees and depends on the General Partner and its
affiliates for the management and administration of all Partnership activities.
The Partnership Agreement provides for (i) payments to affiliates for services
and (ii) reimbursement of certain expenses incurred by affiliates on behalf of
the Partnership.
Affiliates of the General Partner receive 5% of gross receipts from the
Partnership's property as compensation for providing property management
services. The Partnership paid to such affiliates approximately $17,000 and
$18,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively, which
is included in operating expenses.
Affiliates of the General Partner charged the Partnership reimbursement of
accountable administrative expenses amounting to approximately $26,000 and
$15,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively, which
is included in general and administrative expenses and investment property. The
portion of these reimbursements included in investment property for the three
months ended March 31, 2005 are fees related to construction management services
provided by an affiliate of the General Partner of approximately $14,000. There
were no such fees for the three months ended March 31, 2004. The construction
management service fees are calculated based on a percentage of current year
additions to investment property. At March 31, 2005, approximately $41,000 of
reimbursements for services was accrued by the Partnership and is included in
due to affiliates on the accompanying consolidated balance sheet.
The Partnership Agreement provides for a fee equal to 9% of distributable cash
from operations (as defined in the Partnership Agreement) received by the
limited partners to be paid to the General Partner for executive and
administrative management services. There were no such fees earned for the three
months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
In accordance with the Partnership Agreement, an affiliate of the General
Partner loaned the Partnership approximately $92,000 during the fourth quarter
of 2004 to fund capital projects and accounts payable at the Partnership's sole
property. Interest accrues at the prime rate plus 2% (7.75% at March 31, 2005).
Interest expense was approximately $2,000 for the three months ended March 31,
2005. At March 31, 2005, approximately $94,000 was outstanding and is included
in due to affiliates on the accompanying consolidated balance sheet. Subsequent
to March 31, 2005, an affiliate of the General Partner loaned the Partnership an
additional $75,000 to fund property operations at the Partnership's sole
property.
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 three months ended March 31, 2005, the Partnership was
charged by AIMCO and its affiliates approximately $13,000 for hazard insurance
coverage and fees associated with policy claims administration. Additional
charges will be incurred by the Partnership during 2005 as other insurance
policies renew later in the year. The Partnership was charged by AIMCO and its
affiliates approximately $20,000 for insurance coverage and fees associated with
policy claims administration during the year ended December 31, 2004.
Note C - Property Taxes
During 2003, the state of Indiana implemented a reassessment of property values.
During 2004, the Partnership successfully appealed the reassessed property tax
value of Hunt Club Apartments. In the state of Indiana property tax bills are
paid one year in arrears. Thus, the 2003 property tax bills were received and
paid in 2004. As a result of the Partnership's successful appeal of the
reassessed property value an adjustment of approximately $16,000 related to 2002
taxes and $48,000 related to 2003 taxes was recorded during the third and fourth
quarters of 2004. The appeal resulted in a lower assessed value which resulted
in a refund of 2002 taxes paid in 2003, a refund for 2003 taxes paid in 2004 and
a reduction in the accrual for 2004 taxes to be paid in 2005.
Note D - Contingencies
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. In addition, during the third quarter of 2001, a
complaint captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group (the "Heller action") was
filed against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action. 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. On January 28, 2002, the trial
court granted defendants motion to strike the complaint.
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
judgment in both the Nuanes and Heller actions. On August 12, 2003, an objector
("Objector") filed an appeal (the "Appeal") seeking to vacate and/or reverse the
order approving the settlement and entering judgment thereto. On May 4, 2004,
the Objector filed a second appeal challenging the court's use of a referee and
its order requiring Objector to pay those fees.
On March 21, 2005, the Court of Appeals issued opinions in both pending appeals.
With regard to the settlement and judgment entered thereto, the Court of Appeals
vacated the trial court's order and remanded to the trial court for further
findings on the basis that the "state of the record is insufficient to permit
meaningful appellate review". With regard to the second appeal, the Court of
Appeals reversed the order requiring the Objector to pay referee fees. On April
26, 2005, the Court of Appeals lifted the stay of a pending appeal related to
the Heller action and the trial court's order striking the complaint.On April
28, 2005, the Objector filed a Petition for Review with the California Supreme
Court in connection with the opinion vacating the order approving settlement and
remanding for further findings. The General Partner and its affiliates are
currently scheduled to file an answer to Objector's petition on May 18, 2005.
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.
As previously disclosed AIMCO Properties L.P. and NHP Management Company, both
affiliates of the General Partner, are defendants in a lawsuit alleging that
they willfully violated the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") by failing to pay
maintenance workers overtime for all hours worked in excess of forty per week.
The complaint attempts to bring a collective action under the FLSA and seeks to
certify state subclasses in California, Maryland, and the District of Columbia.
Specifically, the plaintiffs contend that AIMCO Properties L.P. and NHP
Management Company failed to compensate maintenance workers for time that they
were required to be "on-call." Additionally, the complaint alleges AIMCO
Properties L.P. and NHP Management Company failed to comply with the FLSA in
compensating maintenance workers for time that they worked in responding to a
call while "on-call." The defendants have filed an answer to the amended
complaint denying the substantive allegations. Oral argument relating to the
certification of the collective action is scheduled for May 12, 2005. Although
the outcome of any litigation is uncertain, AIMCO Properties, L.P. does not
believe that the ultimate outcome will have a material adverse effect on its
financial condition or results of operations. Similarly, the General Partner
does not believe that the ultimate outcome will have a material adverse effect
on the Partnership's consolidated financial condition or results of operations.
The Partnership is unaware of any other pending or outstanding litigation
matters involving it or its investment property that are not of a routine nature
arising in the ordinary course of business.
Environmental
Various Federal, state and local laws subject property owners or operators to
liability for management, and the costs of removal or remediation, of certain
hazardous substances present on a property. Such laws often impose liability
without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for,
the release or presence of the hazardous substances. The presence of, or the
failure to manage or remedy properly, hazardous substances may adversely affect
occupancy at affected apartment communities and the ability to sell or finance
affected properties. In addition to the costs associated with investigation and
remediation actions brought by government agencies, the presence of hazardous
substances on a property could result in claims by private plaintiffs for
personal injury, disease, disability or other infirmities. Various laws also
impose liability for the cost of removal, remediation or disposal of hazardous
substances through a licensed disposal or treatment facility. Anyone who
arranges for the disposal or treatment of hazardous substances is potentially
liable under such laws. These laws often impose liability whether or not the
person arranging for the disposal ever owned or operated the disposal facility.
In connection with the ownership and operation of its property, the Partnership
could potentially be liable for environmental liabilities or costs associated
with its property.
Mold
The Partnership is aware of lawsuits against owners and managers of multifamily
properties asserting claims of personal injury and property damage caused by the
presence of mold, some of which have resulted in substantial monetary judgments
or settlements. The Partnership has only limited insurance coverage for property
damage loss claims arising from the presence of mold and for personal injury
claims related to mold exposure. Affiliates of the General Partner have
implemented a national policy and procedures to prevent or eliminate mold from
its properties and the General Partner believes that these measures will
eliminate, or at least minimize, the effects that mold could have on residents.
To date, the Partnership has not incurred any material costs or liabilities
relating to claims of mold exposure or to abate mold conditions. Because the law
regarding mold is unsettled and subject to change the General Partner can make
no assurance that liabilities resulting from the presence of or exposure to mold
will not have a material adverse effect on the Partnership's consolidated
financial condition or results of operations.
SEC Investigation
The Central Regional Office of the United States Securities and Exchange
Commission (the "SEC") is conducting a formal investigation relating to certain
matters. Although the staff of the SEC is not limited in the areas that it may
investigate, AIMCO believes the areas of investigation include AIMCO's
miscalculated monthly net rental income figures in third quarter 2003,
forecasted guidance, accounts payable, rent concessions, vendor rebates,
capitalization of payroll and certain other costs, and tax credit transactions.
At the end of the first quarter of 2005, the SEC added certain tender offers for
limited partnership interests as an area of investigation. AIMCO is cooperating
fully. AIMCO is not able to predict when the investigation will be resolved.
AIMCO does not believe that the ultimate outcome will have a material adverse
effect on its consolidated financial condition or results of operations.
Similarly, the General Partner does not believe that the ultimate outcome will
have a material adverse effect on the Partnership's consolidated financial
condition or results of operations.
ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATION
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. The
following table sets forth the average occupancy of the property for each of the
three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004:
Average Occupancy
Property 2005 2004
Hunt Club Apartments 92% 92%
Indianapolis, Indiana
The Partnership's financial results depend upon a number of factors including
the ability to attract and maintain tenants at the Partnership's remaining
investment property, interest rates on mortgage loans, costs incurred to operate
the investment property, general economic conditions and weather. 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, the General Partner may use rental concessions and
rental rate reductions to offset softening market conditions, accordingly, there
is no guarantee that the General Partner will be able to sustain such a plan.
Further, a number of factors that are outside the control of the Partnership,
such as the local economic climate and weather, can adversely or positively
affect the Partnership's financial results.
Results of Operations
The Partnership's net loss for the three months ended March 31, 2005 was
approximately $136,000 as compared to a net loss of approximately $81,000 for
the three months ended March 31, 2004. The increase in net loss is due to a
decrease in total revenues and an increase in total expenses.
The decrease in total revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2005 was due
to a decrease in other income partially offset by an increase in rental income.
Other income decreased primarily due to a decrease in late charges, lease
cancellation fees and utilities reimbursements. Rental income increased due to a
decrease in bad debt expense and a slight increase in the average rental rate at
Hunt Club Apartments.
Total expenses for the three months ended March 31, 2005 increased primarily due
to an increase in operating expense partially offset by a decrease in general
and administrative expense. Depreciation, property tax, and interest expenses
remained relatively constant for the comparable periods. Operating expenses
increased due to increases in property and maintenance expense. Property expense
increased due to increases in utility expense and salary and related benefit
expenses at the Partnership's investment property. Maintenance expenses
increased due to contract services, painting supplies, snow removal expense and
repair costs associated with a water pipe which burst during January 2005.
General and administrative expenses decreased due to a decrease in accountable
reimbursements charged by an affiliate of the General Partner as allowed under
the Partnership Agreement and a decrease in audit fees. Also included in general
and administrative expenses are costs associated with the quarterly and annual
communications with investors and regulatory agencies and the annual audit
required by the Partnership Agreement.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
At March 31, 2005, the Partnership had cash and cash equivalents of
approximately $8,000 as compared to approximately $320,000 at March 31, 2004.
Cash and cash equivalents decreased approximately $8,000 from December 31, 2004
due to approximately $28,000 and $26,000 of cash used in financing and investing
activities, respectively, partially offset by approximately $46,000 of cash
provided by operating activities. Cash used in financing activities consisted of
principal payments made on the mortgage encumbering the Partnership's property.
Cash used in investing activities consisted of property improvements and
replacements. 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. For example, 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. Capital improvements planned for the Partnership's property are
detailed below.
During the three months ended March 31, 2005, the Partnership completed
approximately $50,000 of capital improvements at Hunt Club Apartments,
consisting primarily of floor covering replacements and structural improvements.
These improvements were funded from operating cash flow. The Partnership
regularly evaluates the capital improvement needs of the property. While the
Partnership has no material commitments for property improvements and
replacements, certain routine expenditures are anticipated during the remainder
of 2005. Such capital expenditures will depend on the physical condition of the
property as well as the anticipated cash flow generated by the property.
The additional capital expenditures will be incurred only if cash is available
from operations or from Partnership reserves. To the extent that such budgeted
capital improvements are completed, the Partnership's distributable cash flow,
if any, may be affected at least in the short term.
The Partnership's assets are thought to be sufficient for any near-term needs
(exclusive of capital improvements) of the Partnership. The mortgage
indebtedness encumbering Hunt Club Apartments of approximately $3,473,000 is
amortized over 20 years and matures September 1, 2020 at which time the loan is
scheduled to be fully amortized.
There were no distributions made during the three months ended March 31, 2005
and 2004. Future cash distributions will depend on the levels of net cash
generated from operations, the timing of the debt maturity, property sale and/or
refinancing. The Partnership's cash available for distribution is reviewed on a
monthly basis. There can be no assurance, however, that the Partnership will
generate sufficient funds from operations after required capital expenditures to
permit distributions to its partners in 2005 or subsequent periods.
Other
In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interest in the
Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 63,163 "A" and 40,151 "B" Units of
Depository Receipts ("Units") in the Partnership representing 65.60% and 53.43%
of the outstanding "A" and "B" Units, respectively, at March 31, 2005. 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 AIMCO
Properties, L.P., 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 65.60% and 53.43% of the outstanding
"A" and "B" Units, respectively, AIMCO and its affiliates are in a position to
control all such 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
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, but are not limited
to, 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 of the
Partnership's asset.
Revenue Recognition
The Partnership generally leases apartment units for twelve-month terms or less.
The Partnership will offer rental concessions during particularly slow months or
in response to heavy competition from other similar complexes in the area.
Rental income attributable to leases, net of any concessions, is recognized on a
straight-line basis over the term of the lease. The Partnership evaluates all
accounts receivable from residents and establishes an allowance, after the
application of security deposits, for accounts greater than 30 days past due on
current tenants and all receivables due from former tenants.
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 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 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. In addition, during the third quarter of 2001, a
complaint captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group (the "Heller action") was
filed against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action. 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. On January 28, 2002, the trial
court granted defendants motion to strike the complaint.
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
judgment in both the Nuanes and Heller actions. On August 12, 2003, an objector
("Objector") filed an appeal (the "Appeal") seeking to vacate and/or reverse the
order approving the settlement and entering judgment thereto. On May 4, 2004,
the Objector filed a second appeal challenging the court's use of a referee and
its order requiring Objector to pay those fees.
On March 21, 2005, the Court of Appeals issued opinions in both pending appeals.
With regard to the settlement and judgment entered thereto, the Court of Appeals
vacated the trial court's order and remanded to the trial court for further
findings on the basis that the "state of the record is insufficient to permit
meaningful appellate review". With regard to the second appeal, the Court of
Appeals reversed the order requiring the Objector to pay referee fees. On April
26, 2005, the Court of Appeals lifted the stay of a pending appeal related to
the Heller action and the trial court's order striking the complaint. On April
28, 2005, the Objector filed a Petition for Review with the California Supreme
Court in connection with the opinion vacating the order approving settlement and
remanding for further findings. The General Partner and its affiliates are
currently scheduled to file an answer to Objector's petition on May 18, 2005.
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.
As previously disclosed AIMCO Properties L.P. and NHP Management Company, both
affiliates of the General Partner, are defendants in a lawsuit alleging that
they willfully violated the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") by failing to pay
maintenance workers overtime for all hours worked in excess of forty per week.
The complaint attempts to bring a collective action under the FLSA and seeks to
certify state subclasses in California, Maryland, and the District of Columbia.
Specifically, the plaintiffs contend that AIMCO Properties L.P. and NHP
Management Company failed to compensate maintenance workers for time that they
were required to be "on-call." Additionally, the complaint alleges AIMCO
Properties L.P. and NHP Management Company failed to comply with the FLSA in
compensating maintenance workers for time that they worked in responding to a
call while "on-call." The defendants have filed an answer to the amended
complaint denying the substantive allegations. Oral argument relating to the
certification of the collective action is scheduled for May 12, 2005. Although
the outcome of any litigation is uncertain, AIMCO Properties, L.P. does not
believe that the ultimate outcome will have a material adverse effect on its
financial condition or results of operations. Similarly, the General Partner
does not believe that the ultimate outcome will have a material adverse effect
on the Partnership's consolidated financial condition or results of operations.
ITEM 5. OTHER INFORMATION
None.
ITEM 6. EXHIBITS
See Exhibit Index.
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.
MULTI-BENEFIT REALTY FUND '87-1
By: CONCAP EQUITIES, INC.
General Partner
By: /s/Martha L. Long
Martha L. Long
Senior Vice President
By: /s/Stephen B. Waters
Stephen B. Waters
Vice President
Date: May 12, 2005
MULTI-BENEFIT REALTY FUND '87-1
EXHIBIT INDEX
Exhibit
3.1 Agreement of Limited Partnership, incorporated by reference to
Exhibit A-5 to the Prospectus of the Registrant dated December 10,
1986 as filed with the Commission pursuant to Rule 424(b) under the
Act.
3.2 Certificate of Limited Partnership (incorporated by reference to
Registration Statement of Registrant (File No. 33-8908) filed
December 10, 1986, as amended by date).
4 Depositary Agreement (Incorporated by reference to Registration
Statement of Registrant (File No. 33-8908) filed December 10, 1986, as
amended by date).
10.22 Multifamily Note dated August 31, 2000, by and between Hunt Club
Associates, Ltd., a Texas limited partnership, and ARCS Commercial
Mortgage Co., L.P., a California limited partnership relating to Hunt
Club Apartments. (Incorporated by reference to the Quarterly Report on
Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2000.)
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.
Exhibit 31.1
CERTIFICATION
I, Martha L. Long, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Multi-Benefit
Realty Fund '87-1;
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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;
4. The small business issuer'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 small business issuer 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
small business issuer, 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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small
business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over
financial reporting; and
5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
committee of the small business issuer'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 small business issuer'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 small business
issuer's internal control over financial reporting.
Date: May 12, 2005
/s/Martha L. Long
Martha L. Long
Senior Vice President of ConCap Equities,
Inc., equivalent of the chief executive
officer of the Partnership
Exhibit 31.2
CERTIFICATION
I, Stephen B. Waters, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Multi-Benefit
Realty Fund '87-1;
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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;
4. The small business issuer'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 small business issuer 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
small business issuer, 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 small business issuer'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 small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small
business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over
financial reporting; and
5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
committee of the small business issuer'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 small business issuer'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 small business
issuer's internal control over financial reporting.
Date: May 12, 2005
/s/Stephen B. Waters
Stephen B. Waters
Vice President 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 Multi-Benefit Realty
Fund '87-1 (the "Partnership"), for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2005 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), Martha L. Long, as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer of
the Partnership, and Stephen B. Waters, 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/Martha L. Long
Name: Martha L. Long
Date: May 12, 2005
/s/Stephen B. Waters
Name: Stephen B. Waters
Date: May 12, 2005
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.