-----BEGIN PRIVACY-ENHANCED MESSAGE----- Proc-Type: 2001,MIC-CLEAR Originator-Name: webmaster@www.sec.gov Originator-Key-Asymmetric: MFgwCgYEVQgBAQICAf8DSgAwRwJAW2sNKK9AVtBzYZmr6aGjlWyK3XmZv3dTINen TWSM7vrzLADbmYQaionwg5sDW3P6oaM5D3tdezXMm7z1T+B+twIDAQAB MIC-Info: RSA-MD5,RSA, WTc39hdwN6gGj+ddire7TqsdPKnG4zfarz5zT3a2P+z+NI/ko6gxgb4UzVzn7RSE W9XX31s3rWOnNG881PeckA== 0000711642-03-000306.txt : 20030813 0000711642-03-000306.hdr.sgml : 20030813 20030813135326 ACCESSION NUMBER: 0000711642-03-000306 CONFORMED SUBMISSION TYPE: 10QSB PUBLIC DOCUMENT COUNT: 1 CONFORMED PERIOD OF REPORT: 20030630 FILED AS OF DATE: 20030813 FILER: COMPANY DATA: COMPANY CONFORMED NAME: ANGELES PARTNERS VII CENTRAL INDEX KEY: 0000310303 STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION: OPERATORS OF NONRESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS [6512] IRS NUMBER: 953215214 STATE OF INCORPORATION: CA FISCAL YEAR END: 1231 FILING VALUES: FORM TYPE: 10QSB SEC ACT: 1934 Act SEC FILE NUMBER: 000-08851 FILM NUMBER: 03840339 BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET 1: 1873 SOUTH BELLAIRE STREET STREET 2: 17TH FLOOR CITY: DENVER STATE: CO ZIP: 80222 BUSINESS PHONE: 3037578101 MAIL ADDRESS: STREET 1: 1873 SOUTH BELLAIRE STREET STREET 2: 17TH FLOOR CITY: DENVER STATE: CO ZIP: 80222 10QSB 1 ap7.txt AP7 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 0-8851 ANGELES PARTNERS VII (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) California 95-3215214 (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 ANGELES PARTNERS VII BALANCE SHEET (Unaudited) (in thousands, except unit data) June 30, 2003
Assets Cash and cash equivalents $ 116 Receivables and deposits 25 Other assets 97 Restricted escrows 91 Investment property: Land $ 366 Buildings and related personal property 6,080 6,446 Less accumulated depreciation (5,381) 1,065 $ 1,394 Liabilities and Partners' Capital (Deficiency) Liabilities Accounts payable $ 34 Tenant security deposit liabilities 29 Accrued property taxes 23 Other liabilities 80 Mortgage note payable 2,625 Partners' Capital (Deficiency) General partner $ 193 Limited partners (8,669 units issued and outstanding) (1,590) (1,397) $ 1,394 See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements
ANGELES PARTNERS VII STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (Unaudited) (in thousands, except per unit data) Three Months Ended Six Months Ended June 30, June 30, 2003 2002 2003 2002 Revenues: Rental income $ 297 $ 333 $ 547 $ 659 Other income 24 23 49 43 Total revenues 321 356 596 702 Expenses: Operating 145 126 300 239 General and administrative 23 31 47 60 Depreciation 65 67 130 134 Interest 46 48 91 97 Property taxes 11 12 22 23 Total expenses 290 284 590 553 Net income $ 31 $ 72 $ 6 $ 149 Net income allocated to general partner (1%) $ -- $ 1 $ -- $ 1 Net income allocated to limited partners (99%) 31 71 6 148 $ 31 $ 72 $ 6 $ 149 Net income per limited partnership unit $ 3.58 $ 8.19 $ 0.69 $ 17.07 Distributions per limited partnership unit $ -- $ 10.84 $ -- $ 10.84 See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements ANGELES PARTNERS VII STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' CAPITAL (DEFICIENCY) (Unaudited) (in thousands, except unit data)
Limited Partnership General Limited Units Partner Partners Total Original capital contributions 8,674 $ 88 $ 8,674 $ 8,762 Partners' capital (deficiency) at December 31, 2002 8,669 $ 193 $(1,596) $(1,403) Net income for the six months ended June 30, 2003 -- -- 6 6 Partners' capital (deficiency) at June 30, 2003 8,669 $ 193 $(1,590) $(1,397) See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements
ANGELES PARTNERS VII STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (Unaudited) (in thousands)
Six Months Ended June 30, 2003 2002 Cash flows from operating activities: Net income $ 6 $ 149 Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: Depreciation 130 134 Amortization of loan costs 3 2 Change in accounts: Receivables and deposits 11 10 Other assets (33) (22) Accounts payable 20 2 Tenant security deposit liabilities 14 (2) Accrued property taxes 23 23 Other liabilities (19) -- Net cash provided by operating activities 155 296 Cash flows from investing activities: Property improvements and replacements (66) (26) Net withdrawals from (deposits to) restricted escrows 52 (49) Net cash used in investing activities (14) (75) Cash flows from financing activities: Distributions to partners -- (95) Payments on mortgage note payable (90) (84) Net cash used in financing activities (90) (179) Net increase in cash and cash equivalents 51 42 Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period 65 108 Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $ 116 $ 150 Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information: Cash paid for interest $ 89 $ 94 See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements
ANGELES PARTNERS VII NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited) Note A - Basis of Presentation The accompanying unaudited financial statements of Angeles Partners VII (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 Angeles Realty Corporation (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 month periods ended June 30, 2003, are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending December 31, 2003. For further information, refer to the financial statements and footnotes thereto included in the Partnership's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2002. The General Partner is a wholly owned subsidiary of Apartment Investment and Management Company ("AIMCO"), a publicly traded real estate investment trust. Note B - Transactions with Affiliated Parties 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 (i) certain payments to affiliates for services and (ii) 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 for providing property management services. The Partnership paid to such affiliates approximately $30,000 and $35,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2002, respectively, which is included in operating expenses. An affiliate of the General Partner received reimbursement of accountable administrative expenses amounting to approximately $22,000 and $28,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2002, respectively, which is included in general and administrative expenses. The Partnership Agreement provides for a fee equal to 7.5% of "net cash flow from operations", as defined in the Partnership Agreement to be paid to the General Partner for executive and administrative management services. As of June 30, 2003, the Partnership owed the General Partner approximately $5,000 for services rendered in prior years related to the Partnership management fees, which is included in other liabilities. 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. For both the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2002, the Partnership was charged by AIMCO and its affiliates approximately $21,000 for insurance coverage and fees associated with policy claims administration. Note C - Legal Proceedings In March 1998, several putative unit holders of limited partnership units of the Partnership commenced an action entitled Rosalie Nuanes, et al. v. Insignia Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Mateo. The plaintiffs named as defendants, among others, the Partnership, its 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 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 the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2002: Average Occupancy Property 2003 2002 Cedarwood Apartments 84% 92% Gretna, Louisiana The General Partner attributes the decrease in occupancy to the weakening of the general economy in the area and to the decline of the surrounding neighborhoods. Management has launched an aggressive campaign to increase occupancy and occupancy has shown a steady increase in 2003. Results of Operations The Partnership's net income for the three and six months ended June 30, 2003 was approximately $31,000 and $6,000 respectively as compared to net income of approximately $72,000 and $149,000 for the corresponding periods in 2002. The decrease in net income for both the three and six months ended June 30, 2003 was due to a decrease in total revenues and for the six months ended June 30, 2003, an increase in total expenses. Total revenues decreased due to a decrease in rental income, which was caused by the decrease in occupancy at the property and an increase in concessions and special promotions. For the six months ended June 30, 2003, total expenses increased due to an increase in operating expenses. Operating expenses increased due to increases in maintenance and property expenses. Maintenance expense increased due to increases in contract labor and property repairs. Property expense increased due to increases in payroll and related expenses at the Partnership's investment property. Expenses remained comparable for the three months ended June 30, 2003 and 2002. Included in general and administrative expense for the three and six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2002 are management reimbursements to the General Partner allowed under the Partnership Agreement. In addition, costs associated with the quarterly and annual communications with investors and regulatory agencies and the annual audit required by the Partnership Agreement are also included. 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 needed 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 $116,000 as compared to approximately $150,000 at June 30, 2002. Cash and cash equivalents increased approximately $51,000 since December 31, 2002, due to approximately $155,000 of cash provided by operating activities partially offset by approximately $90,000 and $14,000 of cash used in financing and investing activities, respectively. Cash used in financing activities consisted of principal payments made on the mortgage encumbering the Partnership's investment property. Cash used in investing activities consisted of property improvements and replacements partially offset by net withdrawals from restricted escrows held by the mortgage lender. 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 investment 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 detailed below. Cedarwood Apartments: During the six months ended June 30, 2003, the Partnership completed approximately $66,000 of capital improvements at Cedarwood Apartments, consisting primarily of parking lot resurfacing, perimeter fencing, swimming pool improvements and appliance and floor covering replacements. These improvements were funded from operating cash flow and replacement reserves. The Partnership evaluates the capital improvement needs of the property during the year and currently expects to complete an additional $9,000 in capital improvements during the remainder of 2003. The additional capital improvements will consist primarily of light fixtures and floor covering replacements. Additional capital improvements may be considered and will depend on the physical condition of the property as well as replacement reserves and the anticipated cash flow generated by the property. Additional capital expenditures will be incurred only if cash is available from operations or from replacement reserves. To the extent that such budgeted capital improvements are completed, the Partnership's distributable cash flow, if any, may be adversely 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 of approximately $2,625,000 has a maturity date of July 2013 at which time the mortgage is scheduled to be fully amortized. The Partnership distributed the following amounts during the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2002 (in thousands, except per unit data):
Six Months Per Limited Six Months Per Limited Ended Partnership Ended Partnership June 30, 2003 Unit June 30, 2002 Unit Operations $ -- $ -- $ 95 $10.84
The Partnership's cash available for distribution is reviewed on a monthly basis. 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 the sale of the property. There can be no assurance that the Partnership will generate sufficient funds from operations, after required capital improvement expenditures, to permit any distributions to its partners during the remainder of 2003 or subsequent periods. Other In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interest in the Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 5,893 limited partnership units (the "Units") in the Partnership representing 67.98% 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 67.98% of the outstanding Units, AIMCO and its affiliates are in a position to influence 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 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 the 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 reserves all balances outstanding 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 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. 13 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. 18 ITEM 6. EXHIBITS AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K a) Exhibits: Exhibit 3.1, Amended Certificate and Agreement of the Limited Partnership, filed as an exhibit to Form 10K dated October 31, 1978 and is incorporated herein by reference. Exhibit 31.1, Certification of equivalent of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a), as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Exhibit 31.2, Certification of equivalent of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a), as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Exhibit 32.1, Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. b) Reports on Form 8-K: None filed during the quarter ended June 30, 2003. SIGNATURES In accordance with the requirements of the Exchange Act, the Registrant caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized. ANGELES PARTNERS VII By: Angeles Realty Corporation 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 Angeles Partners VII; 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 Angeles Realty Corporation, equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATION I, Paul J. McAuliffe, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Angeles Partners VII; 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 Angeles Realty Corporation, equivalent of the chief financial officer of the Partnership Exhibit 32.1 Certification of CEO and CFO Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Angeles Partners VII (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. -----END PRIVACY-ENHANCED MESSAGE-----