-----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, W1xsOhvGqFCFXAHZm2T3JBin4pHaqZ4/CLev+zeqgGNUSlniQp3LjjmFYtvogbah A5if/L4jaPoYONUdHAEiWg== 0000711642-02-000191.txt : 20020814 0000711642-02-000191.hdr.sgml : 20020814 20020814090331 ACCESSION NUMBER: 0000711642-02-000191 CONFORMED SUBMISSION TYPE: 10QSB PUBLIC DOCUMENT COUNT: 1 CONFORMED PERIOD OF REPORT: 20020630 FILED AS OF DATE: 20020814 FILER: COMPANY DATA: COMPANY CONFORMED NAME: CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XX CENTRAL INDEX KEY: 0000736909 STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION: REAL ESTATE [6500] IRS NUMBER: 942930770 STATE OF INCORPORATION: CA FISCAL YEAR END: 1231 FILING VALUES: FORM TYPE: 10QSB SEC ACT: 1934 Act SEC FILE NUMBER: 000-13408 FILM NUMBER: 02731768 BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET 1: 55 BEATTIE PLACE STREET 2: PO BOX 1089 CITY: GREENVILLE STATE: SC ZIP: 29602 BUSINESS PHONE: 8642391000 MAIL ADDRESS: STREET 1: POST & HEYMANN STREET 2: 5665 NORTHSIDE DRIVE NW CITY: ATLANTA STATE: GA ZIP: 30328 10QSB 1 cpf20.txt CPF20 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 June 30, 2002 [ ] TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from _________to _________ Commission file number 0-13408 CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XX (Exact name of small business issuer as specified in its charter) California 94-2930770 (State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer incorporation or organization) Identification No.) 55 Beattie Place, PO Box 1089 Greenville, South Carolina 29602 (Address of principal executive offices) (864) 239-1000 (Issuer's telephone number) PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XX STATEMENT OF NET LIABILITIES IN LIQUIDATION (unaudited) (in thousands, except unit data) June 30, 2002 Assets Cash and cash equivalents $ 188 Receivables and deposits 13 Debt trustee escrow 713 914 Liabilities Other liabilities 90 Non-recourse promissory notes (Note A) 1,620 Estimated costs during the period of liquidation 32 1,742 Net liabilities in liquidation $ (828) See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XX STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN NET LIABILITIES IN LIQUIDATION (Unaudited) (in thousands)
For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2002 2001 Net liabilities in liquidation at beginning of period $ (775) $(1,154) Changes in net liabilities in liquidation attributed to: Decrease in cash and cash equivalents (492) (679) Decrease in receivables and deposits -- (19) Increase in debt trustee escrow 383 750 Increase in investment properties -- 406 Decrease in accounts payable -- 48 Increase in tenant security deposit payable -- (9) Decrease in accrued property taxes -- 43 Decrease (increase) in other liabilities 1 (16) Increase in Non-Recourse Promissory Notes and interest (39) (194) Decrease (increase) in estimated costs during the period of liquidation 94 (30) Net liabilities in liquidation at end of period $ (828) $ (854) See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements
CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XX NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited) Note A - Basis of Presentation As of December 31, 1999, Century Properties Fund XX (the "Partnership" or "Registrant") adopted the liquidation basis of accounting due to the imminent loss of its remaining investment properties. The Partnership's Nonrecourse Promissory Notes, which had a balance of principal and accrued interest of approximately $1,620,000 at June 30, 2002, matured on November 30, 1998. The Partnership was in default due to non-payment upon maturity. Fox Capital Management Corporation ("FCMC" or the "Managing General Partner"), the general partner of the Partnership's general partner, previously contacted the indenture trustee for the Notes and certain holders of the Notes regarding this default. On October 28, 1999 the Partnership entered into a forbearance agreement with the indenture trustee for a period of 390 days. In turn, the Partnership agreed to (a) deliver to the indenture trustee for the benefit of the note holders all of the accumulated cash of the Partnership, less certain reserves and anticipated operating expenses, (b) market all of its properties for sale, (c) deliver all cash proceeds from any sales to the indenture trustee until the notes are fully satisfied and (d) comply with the reporting requirements under the indenture. At the expiration of the forbearance period, the Partnership had not sold all of its properties or satisfied the Nonrecourse Promissory Notes. With the consent of the indenture trustee, the forbearance period was extended to August 31, 2001. The sale of the Partnership's remaining asset in October 2001 did not generate sufficient proceeds to pay off the Nonrecourse Promissory Notes in full. The Managing General Partner is working with the debt trustee regarding a final payment to the noteholders. Once this payment is made, the Partnership is expected to terminate. The Managing General Partner is a subsidiary of Apartment Investment and Management Company ("AIMCO"), a publicly traded real estate investment trust. As a result of the decision to liquidate the Partnership, the Partnership changed its basis of accounting for its financial statements at December 31, 1999, to the liquidation basis of accounting. Consequently, assets have been valued at estimated net realizable value and liabilities are presented at their estimated settlement amounts. The valuation of assets and liabilities necessarily requires many estimates and assumptions and there are substantial uncertainties in carrying out the liquidation. The actual realization of assets and settlement of liabilities could be higher or lower than amounts indicated and is based upon the Managing General Partner's estimates as of the date of the financial statements. Included in liabilities in the statement of net liabilities in liquidation as of June 30, 2002 is approximately $32,000 of costs, net of income, that the Managing General Partner estimates will be incurred during the period of liquidation based on the assumption that the liquidation process will be completed by September 30, 2002. Because the success in realization of assets and the settlement of liabilities is based on the Managing General Partner's best estimates, the liquidation period may be shorter than projected or it may be extended beyond the projected period. Note B - Transactions with Affiliated Parties The Partnership has no employees and is dependent on the Managing General Partner and its affiliates for the management and administration of all partnership activities. The Partnership Agreement provides for certain payments to affiliates for services and as reimbursement of certain expenses incurred by affiliates on behalf of the Partnership. Affiliates of the Managing General Partner received reimbursement of accountable administrative expenses amounting to approximately $20,000 and $45,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2002 and 2001, respectively. During 2001, the Partnership insured its remaining 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 insured its property above the AIMCO limits through insurance policies obtained by AIMCO from insurers unaffiliated with the Managing General Partner. During the six months ended June 30, 2001, the Partnership was charged by AIMCO and its affiliates approximately $6,000 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 Managing General Partner and several of their affiliated partnerships and corporate entities. The action purports to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the Partnership) which are named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other things, the acquisition of interests in certain Managing General Partner entities by Insignia Financial Group, Inc. ("Insignia") and entities which were, at one time, affiliates of Insignia; past tender offers by the Insignia affiliates to acquire limited partnership units; management of the partnerships by the Insignia affiliates; and the series of transactions which closed on October 1, 1998 and February 26, 1999 whereby Insignia and Insignia Properties Trust, respectively, were merged into AIMCO. The plaintiffs seek monetary damages and equitable relief, including judicial dissolution of the Partnership. On June 25, 1998, the Managing General Partner filed a motion seeking dismissal of the action. In lieu of responding to the motion, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The Managing General Partner filed demurrers to the amended complaint which were heard February 1999. Pending the ruling on such demurrers, settlement negotiations commenced. On November 2, 1999, the parties executed and filed a Stipulation of Settlement, settling claims, subject to court approval, on behalf of the Partnership and all limited partners who owned units as of November 3, 1999. Preliminary approval of the settlement was obtained on November 3, 1999 from the Court, at which time the Court set a final approval hearing for December 10, 1999. Prior to the December 10, 1999 hearing, the Court received various objections to the settlement, including a challenge to the Court's preliminary approval based upon the alleged lack of authority of prior lead counsel to enter the settlement. On December 14, 1999, the Managing General Partner and its affiliates terminated the proposed settlement. In February 2000, counsel for some of the named plaintiffs filed a motion to disqualify plaintiff's lead and liaison counsel who negotiated the settlement. On June 27, 2000, the Court entered an order disqualifying them from the case and an appeal was taken from the order on October 5, 2000. On December 4, 2000, the Court appointed the law firm of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP as new lead counsel for plaintiffs and the putative class. Plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint on January 19, 2001. On March 2, 2001, the Managing General Partner and its affiliates filed a demurrer to the third amended complaint. On May 14, 2001, the Court heard the demurrer to the third amended complaint. On July 10, 2001, the Court issued an order sustaining defendants' demurrer on certain grounds. On July 20, 2001, Plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court's July 10, 2001 order granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer. On September 7, 2001, Plaintiffs filed a fourth amended class and derivative action complaint. On September 12, 2001, the Court denied Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration. On October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated defendants filed a demurrer to the fourth amended complaint, which was heard on December 11, 2001. On February 2, 2002, the Court served its order granting in part the demurrer. The Court has dismissed without leave to amend certain of the plaintiffs' claims. On February 11, 2002, plaintiffs filed a motion seeking to certify a putative class comprised of all non-affiliated persons who own or have owned units in the partnerships. The Managing General Partner and affiliated defendants oppose the motion. On April 29, 2002, the Court held a hearing on plaintiffs' motion for class certification and took the matter under submission after further briefing, as ordered by the court, was submitted by the parties. On July 10, 2002, the Court entered an order vacating the current trial date of January 13, 2003 (as well as the pre-trial and discovery cut-off dates) and stayed the case in its entirety through November 7, 2002 so that the parties can have an opportunity to discuss settlement. During the third quarter of 2001, a complaint (the "Heller action") was filed against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action, captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group. On or about August 6, 2001, plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint. The first amended complaint in the Heller action is brought as a purported derivative action, and asserts claims for among other things breach of fiduciary duty; unfair competition; conversion, unjust enrichment; and judicial dissolution. Plaintiffs in the Nuanes action filed a motion to consolidate the Heller action with the Nuanes action and stated that the Heller action was filed in order to preserve the derivative claims that were dismissed without leave to amend in the Nuanes action by the Court order dated July 10, 2001. On October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated defendants moved to strike the first amended complaint in its entirety for violating the Court's July 10, 2001 order granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer in the Nuanes action, or alternatively, to strike certain portions of the complaint based on the statute of limitations. Other defendants in the action demurred to the fourth amended complaint, and, alternatively, moved to strike the complaint. On December 11, 2001, the court heard argument on the motions and took the matters under submission. On February 4, 2002, the Court served notice of its order granting defendants' motion to strike the Heller complaint as a violation of its July 10, 2001 order in the Nuanes action. On March 27, 2002, the plaintiffs filed a notice appealing the order striking the complaint. The parties are currently in the midst of briefing that appeal. The Managing General Partner does not anticipate that any costs, whether legal or settlement costs, associated with these cases will be material to the Partnership's overall operations. The Partnership is unaware of any other pending or outstanding litigation that is not of a routine nature arising in the ordinary course of business. ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATIONS The matters discussed in this Form 10-QSB contain certain forward-looking statements and involve risks and uncertainties (including changing market conditions, competitive and regulatory matters, etc.) detailed in the disclosures contained in this Form 10-QSB and the other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission made by the Partnership from time to time. The discussion of the Partnership's business and results of operations, including forward-looking statements pertaining to such matters, does not take into account the effects of any changes to the Registrant's business and results of operations. Accordingly, actual results could differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements as a result of a number of factors, including those identified herein. At June 30, 2002, the Partnership had no investment properties. As of December 31, 1999, Century Properties Fund XX (the "Partnership" or "Registrant") adopted the liquidation basis of accounting due to the imminent loss of its remaining investment properties. The Partnership's Nonrecourse Promissory Notes, which had a balance of principal and accrued interest of approximately $1,620,000 at June 30, 2002, matured on November 30, 1998. The Partnership was in default due to non-payment upon maturity. The Managing General Partner had previously contacted the indenture trustee and entered a forbearance agreement on October 28, 1999. In turn, the Partnership agreed to (a) deliver to the indenture trustee for the benefit of the note holders all of the accumulated cash of the Partnership, less certain reserves and anticipated operating expenses, (b) market all of its properties for sale, (c) deliver all cash proceeds from any sales to the indenture trustee until the notes are fully satisfied and (d) comply with the reporting requirements under the indenture. At the expiration of the forbearance period, the Partnership had not sold all of its properties or satisfied the Nonrecourse Promissory Notes. With the consent of the indenture trustee, the forbearance period was extended to August 31, 2001. The sale of the Partnership's remaining asset in October 2001 did not generate sufficient proceeds to pay off the Nonrecourse Promissory Notes in full. The Managing General Partner is working with the debt trustee regarding a final payment to the noteholders. Once this payment is made, the Partnership is expected to terminate. As a result of the decision to liquidate the Partnership, the Partnership changed its basis of accounting for its financial statements at December 31, 1999 to the liquidation basis of accounting. Consequently, assets have been valued at estimated net realizable value and liabilities are presented at their estimated settlement amounts. The valuation of assets and liabilities necessarily requires many estimates and assumptions and there are substantial uncertainties in carrying out the liquidation. The actual realization of assets and settlement of liabilities could be higher or lower than amounts indicated and is based upon the Managing General Partner's estimates as of the date of the financial statements. During the six months ended June 30, 2002, net liabilities increased by approximately $53,000. This increase is primarily due to decreases in cash and cash equivalents and estimated costs during the period of liquidation partially offset by an increase in the debt trustee escrow. The increase in the debt trustee escrow as well as the decrease in cash and cash equivalents is primarily due to the transfer of excess cash from the Partnership to the debt trustee. The decrease in the estimated costs during the period of liquidation is primarily due to three less months until liquidation. During the six months ended June 30, 2001, net liabilities decreased by approximately $300,000. This decrease was primarily due to increases in the debt trustee escrow and investment properties offset by a decrease in cash and cash equivalents. The increase in investment properties was due to an increase in the estimated fair market value of the investment property owned by the Partnership at that time. The decrease in cash and cash equivalents as well as the increase in the debt trustee escrow was primarily due to the transfer of excess cash from the Partnership to the debt trustee. Included in liabilities in the statement of net liabilities in liquidation as of June 30, 2002 is approximately $32,000 of costs, net of income, that the Managing General Partner estimates will be incurred during the period of liquidation based on the assumption that the liquidation process will be completed by September 30, 2002. Because the success in realization of assets and the settlement of liabilities is based on the Managing General Partner's best estimates, the liquidation period may be shorter than projected or it may be extended beyond the projected period. In light of the maturity of the Notes, no distributions were made to the limited partners for the six months ended June 30, 2002 and 2001. In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interest in the Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 3,950 limited partnership units in the Partnership representing 6.39% of the outstanding units at June 30, 2002. A number of these units were acquired pursuant to tender offers made by AIMCO or its affiliates. Under the Partnership Agreement, unitholders holding a majority of the Units are entitled to take action with respect to a variety of matters which would include voting on certain amendments to the Partnership Agreement and voting to remove the Managing General Partner. Although the Managing General Partner owes fiduciary duties to the limited partners of the Partnership, the Managing General Partner also owes fiduciary duties to AIMCO as its sole stockholder. As a result, the duties of the Managing General Partner, as managing general partner, to the Partnerships and its limited partners may come into conflict with the duties of the Managing General Partner to AIMCO, as its sole stockholder. PART II - OTHER INFORMATION ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS In March 1998, several putative unit holders of limited partnership units of the Partnership commenced an action entitled Rosalie Nuanes, et al. v. Insignia Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Mateo. The plaintiffs named as defendants, among others, the Partnership, its Managing General Partner and several of their affiliated partnerships and corporate entities. The action purports to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the Partnership) which are named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other things, the acquisition of interests in certain Managing General Partner entities by Insignia Financial Group, Inc. ("Insignia") and entities which were, at one time, affiliates of Insignia; past tender offers by the Insignia affiliates to acquire limited partnership units; management of the partnerships by the Insignia affiliates; and the series of transactions which closed on October 1, 1998 and February 26, 1999 whereby Insignia and Insignia Properties Trust, respectively, were merged into AIMCO. The plaintiffs seek monetary damages and equitable relief, including judicial dissolution of the Partnership. On June 25, 1998, the Managing General Partner filed a motion seeking dismissal of the action. In lieu of responding to the motion, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The Managing General Partner filed demurrers to the amended complaint which were heard February 1999. Pending the ruling on such demurrers, settlement negotiations commenced. On November 2, 1999, the parties executed and filed a Stipulation of Settlement, settling claims, subject to court approval, on behalf of the Partnership and all limited partners who owned units as of November 3, 1999. Preliminary approval of the settlement was obtained on November 3, 1999 from the Court, at which time the Court set a final approval hearing for December 10, 1999. Prior to the December 10, 1999 hearing, the Court received various objections to the settlement, including a challenge to the Court's preliminary approval based upon the alleged lack of authority of prior lead counsel to enter the settlement. On December 14, 1999, the Managing General Partner and its affiliates terminated the proposed settlement. In February 2000, counsel for some of the named plaintiffs filed a motion to disqualify plaintiff's lead and liaison counsel who negotiated the settlement. On June 27, 2000, the Court entered an order disqualifying them from the case and an appeal was taken from the order on October 5, 2000. On December 4, 2000, the Court appointed the law firm of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP as new lead counsel for plaintiffs and the putative class. Plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint on January 19, 2001. On March 2, 2001, the Managing General Partner and its affiliates filed a demurrer to the third amended complaint. On May 14, 2001, the Court heard the demurrer to the third amended complaint. On July 10, 2001, the Court issued an order sustaining defendants' demurrer on certain grounds. On July 20, 2001, Plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court's July 10, 2001 order granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer. On September 7, 2001, Plaintiffs filed a fourth amended class and derivative action complaint. On September 12, 2001, the Court denied Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration. On October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated defendants filed a demurrer to the fourth amended complaint, which was heard on December 11, 2001. On February 2, 2002, the Court served its order granting in part the demurrer. The Court has dismissed without leave to amend certain of the plaintiffs' claims. On February 11, 2002, plaintiffs filed a motion seeking to certify a putative class comprised of all non-affiliated persons who own or have owned units in the partnerships. The Managing General Partner and affiliated defendants oppose the motion. On April 29, 2002, the Court held a hearing on plaintiffs' motion for class certification and took the matter under submission after further briefing, as ordered by the court, was submitted by the parties. On July 10, 2002, the Court entered an order vacating the current trial date of January 13, 2003 (as well as the pre-trial and discovery cut-off dates) and stayed the case in its entirety through November 7, 2002 so that the parties can have an opportunity to discuss settlement. During the third quarter of 2001, a complaint (the "Heller action") was filed against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action, captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group. On or about August 6, 2001, plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint. The first amended complaint in the Heller action is brought as a purported derivative action, and asserts claims for among other things breach of fiduciary duty; unfair competition; conversion, unjust enrichment; and judicial dissolution. Plaintiffs in the Nuanes action filed a motion to consolidate the Heller action with the Nuanes action and stated that the Heller action was filed in order to preserve the derivative claims that were dismissed without leave to amend in the Nuanes action by the Court order dated July 10, 2001. On October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated defendants moved to strike the first amended complaint in its entirety for violating the Court's July 10, 2001 order granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer in the Nuanes action, or alternatively, to strike certain portions of the complaint based on the statute of limitations. Other defendants in the action demurred to the fourth amended complaint, and, alternatively, moved to strike the complaint. On December 11, 2001, the court heard argument on the motions and took the matters under submission. On February 4, 2002, the Court served notice of its order granting defendants' motion to strike the Heller complaint as a violation of its July 10, 2001 order in the Nuanes action. On March 27, 2002, the plaintiffs filed a notice appealing the order striking the complaint. The parties are currently in the midst of briefing that appeal. The Managing General Partner does not anticipate that any costs, whether legal or settlement costs, associated with these cases will be material to the Partnership's overall operations. ITEM 6. EXHIBITS AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K a) Exhibits: Exhibit 3, Agreement of Limited Partnership, incorporated by reference to Exhibit A to the Prospectus of the Partnership dated February 22, 1984, and November 8, 1984, and thereafter supplemented, contained in the Partnership's Registration Statement on Form S-11 (Reg. No. 2-88615). Exhibit 99, Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer. b) Reports on Form 8-K: None filed during the quarter ended June 30, 2002. SIGNATURES In accordance with the requirements of the Exchange Act, the Registrant caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized. CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XX By: FOX PARTNERS III Its General Partner By: FOX CAPITAL MANAGEMENT CORPORATION Its Managing General Partner By: /s/Patrick J. Foye Patrick J. Foye Executive Vice President By: /s/Thomas C. Novosel Thomas C. Novosel Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer Date: August 14, 2002 Exhibit 99 Certification of CEO and CFO Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Century Properties Fund XX (the "Partnership"), for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Patrick J. Foye, as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer of the Partnership, and Paul J. McAuliffe, as the equivalent of the Chief Financial Officer of the Partnership, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership. /s/ Patrick J. Foye Name: Patrick J. Foye Date: August 14, 2002 /s/ Paul J. McAuliffe Name: Paul J. McAuliffe Date: August 14, 2002 This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Partnership for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. -----END PRIVACY-ENHANCED MESSAGE-----