-----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, WSoSb0ube0OzqGcb6hrfT8EXx0lMbuWNTO+8bl0Po8/DPVA0V9a46kJTcu/J9SWH ILJ0px/3wrI4At/Y/jFTkg== 0000711642-03-000310.txt : 20030814 0000711642-03-000310.hdr.sgml : 20030814 20030813144000 ACCESSION NUMBER: 0000711642-03-000310 CONFORMED SUBMISSION TYPE: 10QSB PUBLIC DOCUMENT COUNT: 1 CONFORMED PERIOD OF REPORT: 20030630 FILED AS OF DATE: 20030813 FILER: COMPANY DATA: COMPANY CONFORMED NAME: CENTURY PENSION INCOME FUND XXIII CENTRAL INDEX KEY: 0000764543 STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION: REAL ESTATE [6500] IRS NUMBER: 942963120 STATE OF INCORPORATION: CA FISCAL YEAR END: 1231 FILING VALUES: FORM TYPE: 10QSB SEC ACT: 1934 Act SEC FILE NUMBER: 000-14528 FILM NUMBER: 03840628 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: 1873 SOUTH BELLAIRE STREET 17TH FLOOR STREET 2: 5665 NORTHSIDE DR NW CITY: DENVER STATE: CO ZIP: 80222 10QSB 1 cpif23.txt CPIF23 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 0-14528 CENTURY PENSION INCOME FUND XXIII (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) California 94-2963120 (State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer incorporation or organization) Identification No.) 55 Beattie Place, P.O. 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 PENSION INCOME FUND XXIII CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF NET LIABILITIES IN LIQUIDATION (Unaudited) (in thousands) June 30, 2003 Assets Cash and cash equivalents $ 202 Receivables and deposits 7 Debt trustee escrow 800 1,009 Liabilities Accounts payable 36 Other liabilities 90 Non-recourse promissory notes: Principal 11,264 Interest payable 15,986 Estimated costs during the period of liquidation 804 28,180 Net liabilities in liquidation $(27,171) See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements CENTURY PENSION INCOME FUND XXIII STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN NET LIABILITIES IN LIQUIDATION (Unaudited) (in thousands)
For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2003 2002 Net liabilities in liquidation at beginning of period $(25,094) $(23,942) Changes in net liabilities in liquidation attributed to: (Decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents (26) 9 (Decrease) increase in receivables and deposits (64) 73 Decrease in debt trustee escrow (133) (4) Decrease in investment in properties (2,820) -- Increase in accounts payable (15) (7) Decrease in tenant security deposits 5 2 Increase in accrued property taxes -- (44) Increase in other liabilities (16) (15) Decrease (increase) in non-recourse promissory notes - interest payable 140 (698) Decrease in non-recourse promissory notes - principal 583 -- Decrease in minority interest in consolidated joint venture -- 170 Decrease in estimated costs during the period of liquidation 269 454 Net liabilities in liquidation at end of period $(27,171) $(24,002) See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
CENTURY PENSION INCOME FUND XXIII NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited) Note A - Basis of Presentation As of December 31, 1999, Century Pension Income Fund XXIII (the "Partnership" or "Registrant") adopted the liquidation basis of accounting due to the imminent loss of its investment properties. The Partnership's Nonrecourse Promissory Notes (the "Notes") are secured by a deed of trust on all properties owned in fee by the Partnership. The Notes were issued in two series. The "1985 Series Notes", in the original principal amount of $33,454,000 bear interest at 12% per annum, and the "1986 Series Notes", in the original principal amount of $8,485,000, bear interest at 10% per annum, except that portions of the interest were deferred, provided the Partnership made minimum interest payments of 5% on the unpaid principal balance. The Notes had a balance of principal and deferred interest of approximately $80,000,000 at their maturity date of February 15, 1999. The Partnership was unable to satisfy the Notes at maturity and as a result, the Partnership was in default on the Nonrecourse Promissory Notes. Fox Capital Management Corporation ("FCMC" or the "Managing General Partner") contacted the indenture trustee for the Nonrecourse Promissory Notes regarding this default. In connection with these conversations, on July 30, 1999 the Partnership entered into a forbearance agreement with the indenture trustee pursuant to which the indenture trustee agreed not to exercise its rights and remedies under the indenture for up to 390 days. In turn, the Partnership agreed to (a) deliver to the indenture trustee for the benefit of the noteholders 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 net 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. On March 31, 2003, the Partnership sold the last remaining property, Commerce Plaza, to an unaffiliated third party. The net sales proceeds of approximately $1,270,000 were delivered to the indenture trustee to be applied to the amounts due to the noteholders. The sale of the Partnership's last remaining asset did not generate sufficient proceeds to pay off the Notes in full. Upon the last payment on the Notes by the indenture trustee, 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 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, including estimated costs associated with carrying out the liquidation. 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 consolidated financial statements. Included in liabilities in the statement of net liabilities in liquidation as of June 30, 2003 is approximately $804,000 of costs that the Managing General Partner estimates will be incurred during the period of liquidation based on the assumption that the liquidation process will be completed by December 31, 2003. Because the success in realization of assets and the settlement of liabilities is based on the Managing General Partner's best estimates, the liquidation period may be shorter than projected or it may be extended beyond the projected period. 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. An affiliate of the Managing General Partner received reimbursement of accountable administrative expenses amounting to approximately $62,000 and $36,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The Partnership insured 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 insured its property above the AIMCO limits through insurance policies obtained by AIMCO from insurers unaffiliated with the Managing General Partner. During 2002, the Partnership was charged by AIMCO and its affiliates approximately $24,000 for insurance coverage and fees associated with policy claims administration. No such coverage was charged during 2003 as the remaining property was sold. Note C - Legal Proceedings In March 1998, several putative unit holders of limited partnership units of the Partnership commenced an action entitled Rosalie Nuanes, et al. v. Insignia Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Mateo. The plaintiffs named as defendants, among others, the Partnership, its Managing General Partner and several of their affiliated partnerships and corporate entities. The action purported to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the Partnership) that are named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other things, the acquisition of interests in certain Managing General Partner entities by Insignia Financial Group, Inc. ("Insignia") and entities that were, at one time, affiliates of Insignia; past tender offers by the Insignia affiliates to acquire limited partnership units; management of the partnerships by the Insignia affiliates; and the series of transactions which closed on October 1, 1998 and February 26, 1999 whereby Insignia and Insignia Properties Trust, respectively, were merged into AIMCO. The plaintiffs sought monetary damages and equitable relief, including judicial dissolution of the Partnership. On June 25, 1998, the Managing General Partner filed a motion seeking dismissal of the action. In lieu of responding to the motion, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The Managing General Partner filed demurrers to the amended complaint, which were heard February 1999. Pending the ruling on such demurrers, settlement negotiations commenced. On November 2, 1999, the parties executed and filed a Stipulation of Settlement, settling claims, subject to court approval, on behalf of the Partnership and all limited partners who owned units as of November 3, 1999. Preliminary approval of the settlement was obtained on November 3, 1999 from the Court, at which time the Court set a final approval hearing for December 10, 1999. Prior to the December 10, 1999 hearing, the Court received various objections to the settlement, including a challenge to the Court's preliminary approval based upon the alleged lack of authority of prior lead counsel to enter the settlement. On December 14, 1999, the Managing General Partner and its affiliates terminated the proposed settlement. In February 2000, counsel for some of the named plaintiffs filed a motion to disqualify plaintiff's lead and liaison counsel who negotiated the settlement. On June 27, 2000, the Court entered an order disqualifying them from the case and an appeal was taken from the order on October 5, 2000. On December 4, 2000, the Court appointed the law firm of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP as new lead counsel for plaintiffs and the putative class. Plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint on January 19, 2001. On March 2, 2001, the Managing General Partner and its affiliates filed a demurrer to the third amended complaint. On May 14, 2001, the Court heard the demurrer to the third amended complaint. On July 10, 2001, the Court issued an order sustaining defendants' demurrer on certain grounds. On July 20, 2001, Plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court's July 10, 2001 order granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer. On September 7, 2001, Plaintiffs filed a fourth amended class and derivative action complaint. On September 12, 2001, the Court denied Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration. On October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated defendants filed a demurrer to the fourth amended complaint, which was heard on December 11, 2001. On February 2, 2002, the Court served its order granting in part the demurrer. The Court dismissed without leave to amend certain of the plaintiffs' claims. On February 11, 2002, plaintiffs filed a motion seeking to certify a putative class comprised of all non-affiliated persons who own or have owned units in the partnerships. The Managing General Partner and affiliated defendants opposed the motion. On April 29, 2002, the Court held a hearing on plaintiffs' motion for class certification and took the matter under submission after further briefing, as ordered by the court, was submitted by the parties. On July 10, 2002, the Court entered an order vacating the trial date of January 13, 2003 (as well as the pre-trial and discovery cut-off dates) and stayed the case in its entirety through November 7, 2002 so that the parties could have an opportunity to discuss settlement. On October 30, 2002, the court entered an order extending the stay in effect through January 10, 2003. During the third quarter of 2001, a complaint (the "Heller action") was filed against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action, captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group. On or about August 6, 2001, plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint. The Heller action was brought as a purported derivative action, and asserted claims for, among other things, breach of fiduciary duty, unfair competition, conversion, unjust enrichment, and judicial dissolution. Plaintiffs in the Nuanes action filed a motion to consolidate the Heller action with the Nuanes action and stated that the Heller action was filed in order to preserve the derivative claims that were dismissed without leave to amend in the Nuanes action by the Court order dated July 10, 2001. On October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated defendants moved to strike the first amended complaint in its entirety for violating the Court's July 10, 2001 order granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer in the Nuanes action, or alternatively, to strike certain portions of the complaint based on the statute of limitations. Other defendants in the action demurred to the fourth amended complaint, and, alternatively, moved to strike the complaint. On December 11, 2001, the court heard argument on the motions and took the matters under submission. On February 4, 2002, the Court served notice of its order granting defendants' motion to strike the Heller complaint as a violation of its July 10, 2001 order in the Nuanes action. On March 27, 2002, the plaintiffs filed a notice appealing the order striking the complaint. Before completing briefing on the appeal, the parties stayed further proceedings in the appeal in light of a settlement. On January 8, 2003, the parties filed a Stipulation of Settlement in proposed settlement of the Nuanes action and the Heller action. On June 13,2003, the Court granted final approval of the settlement and entered judgement in both the Nuanes and Heller actions. While the Nuanes and Heller actions have been dismissed the settlement only benefits limited partners as of December 20, 2002 in those limited partnerships named in the complaint that are not in the process of being liquidated or that have already been liquidated. The Partnership's limited partners will not be entitled to any proceeds from the settlement since the Partnership is in the process of being liquidated, but have not compromised any potential claims as a result of the settlement and dismissal. The Partnership's limited partners should have received a Notice to Non-Settling Persons during April 2003 which describes this information in more detail. The Managing General Partner does not anticipate that any costs to the Partnership, whether legal or settlement costs, associated with these cases will be material to the Partnership's overall operations. The Partnership is unaware of any other pending or outstanding litigation that is not of a routine nature arising in the ordinary course of business. ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF 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; litigation, including costs associated with prosecuting and defending claims and any adverse outcomes, and financing risks, including the risk that cash flows from operations may be insufficient to meet required payments of principal and interest. Readers should carefully review the Registrant's financial statements and the notes thereto, as well as the risk factors described in the documents the Registrant files from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission. As of December 31, 1999, the Partnership adopted the liquidation basis of accounting due to the imminent loss of its investment properties. The Nonrecourse Promissory Notes had a balance of principal and deferred interest of approximately $80,000,000 at their maturity date of February 15, 1999. The Partnership was unable to satisfy the Nonrecourse Promissory Notes (the "Notes") at maturity and as a result, the Partnership was in default on the Notes. The Managing General Partner contacted the indenture trustee for the Notes regarding this default. In connection with these conversations, on July 30, 1999, the Partnership entered into a forbearance agreement with the indenture trustee pursuant to which the indenture trustee agreed not to exercise its rights and remedies under the Notes' indenture for up to 390 days. In turn, the Partnership agreed to (a) deliver to the Notes' indenture trustee for the benefit of the noteholders 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 net 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. On March 31, 2003, the Partnership sold the last remaining property, Commerce Plaza to an unaffiliated third party. The net sales proceeds were delivered to the Notes' indenture trustee to be applied to the amounts due to the noteholders. On March 31, 2003, the Partnership sold Commerce Plaza to an unaffiliated third party for net sales proceeds of approximately $1,270,000 after the payment of closing costs. The Partnership's share of the net sales proceeds of approximately $1,270,000 was delivered to the indenture trustee to be applied to the amounts due to the noteholders. The sale of the Partnership's last remaining asset did not generate sufficient proceeds to pay off the Notes in full. Upon the last payment on the Notes by the indenture trustee, 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 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, including estimated costs associated with carrying out the liquidation. 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 consolidated financial statements. During the six months ended June 30, 2003, net liabilities increased by approximately $2,077,000. This increase is primarily due to decreases in investment properties and the debt trustee escrow partially offset by decreases in both the principal and interest payable on the non-recourse promissory notes and the estimated costs during the period of liquidation. The decrease in investment properties is a result of the sale of Commerce Plaza. The decrease in the debt trustee escrow is due to the payment of expenses by the trustee. The decrease in the principal and interest on the non-recourse promissory notes is due to a payment made to the note holders. The decrease in the estimated costs of liquidation is due to the shorter period of time until the Partnership's expected liquidation. During the six months ended June 30, 2002, net liabilities increased by approximately $60,000. This increase is primarily due to a decrease in the estimated costs during the period of liquidation and investment in the consolidated joint venture partially offset by an increase in the interest payable on the non-recourse promissory notes. The decrease in the estimated costs during the period of liquidation was primarily due to the reduced number of months until the Partnership's expected liquidation. The increase in interest payable was due to the accrual of six months of interest on the current principal balance of approximately $11,264,000. The statement of net liabilities in liquidation as of June 30, 2003 includes approximately $804,000 of costs that the Managing General Partner estimates will be incurred during the period of liquidation, based on the assumption that the liquidation process will be completed by December 31, 2003. Because the success in realization of assets and the settlement of liabilities is based on the Managing General Partner's best estimates, the liquidation period may be shorter or extended beyond the projected period. As a result of the sale of Commerce Plaza, the Partnership made payments on the non-recourse notes of the following amounts during the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2002 (in thousands): Six Months Ended Six Months Ended June 30, 2003 June 30, 2002 Operations 85 Series Notes $1,169 $ -- 86 Series Notes 239 -- $1,408 $ -- The following is a general description of the tax consequences that may result to a limited partner due to the sale of the Partnership's remaining property. Each limited partner should consult with his or her own tax advisor to determine his or her particular tax consequences. The taxable gain and income resulting from the sale of the Partnership's property will pass through to the limited partners, and will likely result in income tax liability to the limited partners without any distribution of cash from the Partnership. The Managing 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. In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interest in the Partnership, AIMCO owned 108 limited partnership units (the "Units") in the Partnership representing approximately 0.11% of the outstanding Units at June 30, 2003. Affiliates of the Managing General Partner also owned 5,511 Individual Investor Units (8.24%) of the Partnership's 1985 Nonrecourse Promissory Notes and 1,635 Individual Investor Units (9.64%) of the Partnership's 1986 Nonrecourse Promissory Notes at June 30, 2003. 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 Partnership and its limited partners may come into conflict with the duties of the Managing General Partner to AIMCO, as its sole stockholder. ITEM 3. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES (a) Disclosure Controls and Procedures. The Partnership's management, with the participation of the principal executive officer and principal financial officer of the Managing General Partner, who are the equivalent of the Partnership's principal executive officer and principal financial officer, respectively, has evaluated the effectiveness of the Partnership's disclosure controls and procedures (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act")) as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on such evaluation, the principal executive officer and principal financial officer of the Managing General Partner, who are the equivalent of the Partnership's principal executive officer and principal financial officer, respectively, have concluded that, as of the end of such period, the Partnership's disclosure controls and procedures are effective. (b) Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. There have not been any changes in the Partnership's internal control over financial reporting (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the fiscal quarter to which this report relates that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Partnership's internal control over financial reporting. PART II - OTHER INFORMATION ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS In March 1998, several putative unit holders of limited partnership units of the Partnership commenced an action entitled Rosalie Nuanes, et al. v. Insignia Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Mateo. The plaintiffs named as defendants, among others, the Partnership, its Managing General Partner and several of their affiliated partnerships and corporate entities. The action purported to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the Partnership) that are named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other things, the acquisition of interests in certain Managing General Partner entities by Insignia Financial Group, Inc. ("Insignia") and entities that were, at one time, affiliates of Insignia; past tender offers by the Insignia affiliates to acquire limited partnership units; management of the partnerships by the Insignia affiliates; and the series of transactions which closed on October 1, 1998 and February 26, 1999 whereby Insignia and Insignia Properties Trust, respectively, were merged into AIMCO. The plaintiffs sought monetary damages and equitable relief, including judicial dissolution of the Partnership. On June 25, 1998, the Managing General Partner filed a motion seeking dismissal of the action. In lieu of responding to the motion, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The Managing General Partner filed demurrers to the amended complaint, which were heard February 1999. Pending the ruling on such demurrers, settlement negotiations commenced. On November 2, 1999, the parties executed and filed a Stipulation of Settlement, settling claims, subject to court approval, on behalf of the Partnership and all limited partners who owned units as of November 3, 1999. Preliminary approval of the settlement was obtained on November 3, 1999 from the Court, at which time the Court set a final approval hearing for December 10, 1999. Prior to the December 10, 1999 hearing, the Court received various objections to the settlement, including a challenge to the Court's preliminary approval based upon the alleged lack of authority of prior lead counsel to enter the settlement. On December 14, 1999, the Managing General Partner and its affiliates terminated the proposed settlement. In February 2000, counsel for some of the named plaintiffs filed a motion to disqualify plaintiff's lead and liaison counsel who negotiated the settlement. On June 27, 2000, the Court entered an order disqualifying them from the case and an appeal was taken from the order on October 5, 2000. On December 4, 2000, the Court appointed the law firm of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP as new lead counsel for plaintiffs and the putative class. Plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint on January 19, 2001. On March 2, 2001, the Managing General Partner and its affiliates filed a demurrer to the third amended complaint. On May 14, 2001, the Court heard the demurrer to the third amended complaint. On July 10, 2001, the Court issued an order sustaining defendants' demurrer on certain grounds. On July 20, 2001, Plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court's July 10, 2001 order granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer. On September 7, 2001, Plaintiffs filed a fourth amended class and derivative action complaint. On September 12, 2001, the Court denied Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration. On October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated defendants filed a demurrer to the fourth amended complaint, which was heard on December 11, 2001. On February 2, 2002, the Court served its order granting in part the demurrer. The Court dismissed without leave to amend certain of the plaintiffs' claims. On February 11, 2002, plaintiffs filed a motion seeking to certify a putative class comprised of all non-affiliated persons who own or have owned units in the partnerships. The Managing General Partner and affiliated defendants opposed the motion. On April 29, 2002, the Court held a hearing on plaintiffs' motion for class certification and took the matter under submission after further briefing, as ordered by the court, was submitted by the parties. On July 10, 2002, the Court entered an order vacating the trial date of January 13, 2003 (as well as the pre-trial and discovery cut-off dates) and stayed the case in its entirety through November 7, 2002 so that the parties could have an opportunity to discuss settlement. On October 30, 2002, the court entered an order extending the stay in effect through January 10, 2003. During the third quarter of 2001, a complaint (the "Heller action") was filed against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action, captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group. On or about August 6, 2001, plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint. The Heller action was brought as a purported derivative action, and asserted claims for, among other things, breach of fiduciary duty, unfair competition, conversion, unjust enrichment, and judicial dissolution. Plaintiffs in the Nuanes action filed a motion to consolidate the Heller action with the Nuanes action and stated that the Heller action was filed in order to preserve the derivative claims that were dismissed without leave to amend in the Nuanes action by the Court order dated July 10, 2001. On October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated defendants moved to strike the first amended complaint in its entirety for violating the Court's July 10, 2001 order granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer in the Nuanes action, or alternatively, to strike certain portions of the complaint based on the statute of limitations. Other defendants in the action demurred to the fourth amended complaint, and, alternatively, moved to strike the complaint. On December 11, 2001, the court heard argument on the motions and took the matters under submission. On February 4, 2002, the Court served notice of its order granting defendants' motion to strike the Heller complaint as a violation of its July 10, 2001 order in the Nuanes action. On March 27, 2002, the plaintiffs filed a notice appealing the order striking the complaint. Before completing briefing on the appeal, the parties stayed further proceedings in the appeal in light of a settlement. On January 8, 2003, the parties filed a Stipulation of Settlement in proposed settlement of the Nuanes action and the Heller action. On June 13,2003, the Court granted final approval of the settlement and entered judgement in both the Nuanes and Heller actions. While the Nuanes and Heller actions have been dismissed the settlement only benefits limited partners as of December 20, 2002 in those limited partnerships named in the complaint that are not in the process of being liquidated or that have already been liquidated. The Partnership's limited partners will not be entitled to any proceeds from the settlement since the Partnership is in the process of being liquidated, but have not compromised any potential claims as a result of the settlement and dismissal. The Partnership's limited partners should have received a Notice to Non-Settling Persons during April 2003 which describes this information in more detail. The Managing General Partner does not anticipate that any costs to the Partnership, whether legal or settlement costs, associated with these cases will be material to the Partnership's overall operations. ITEM 2. 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 July 1, 1985 and thereafter supplemented, contained in the Partnership's Registration Statement on Form S-11 (Reg. No. 2-96389). 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: Current Report on Form 8-K dated March 31, 2003 and filed on April 10, 2003 disclosing the sale of Commerce Plaza. 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 PENSION INCOME FUND XXIII By: FOX PARTNERS V Its General Partner By: FOX CAPITAL MANAGEMENT CORPORATION Its Managing General Partner By: /s/Patrick J. Foye Patrick J. Foye Executive Vice President By: /s/Thomas C. Novosel Thomas C. Novosel Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer Date: August 13, 2003 Exhibit 31.1 CERTIFICATION I, Patrick J. Foye, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Century Properties Income Fund XXIII; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting. Date: August 13, 2003 /s/Patrick J. Foye Patrick J. Foye Executive Vice President of Fox Capital Management Corporation, equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATION I, Paul J. McAuliffe, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Century Properties Income Fund XXIII; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting. Date: August 13, 2003 /s/Paul J. McAuliffe Paul J. McAuliffe Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Fox Capital Management Corporation, equivalent of the chief financial officer of the Partnership Exhibit 32.1 Certification of CEO and CFO Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Century Properties Income Fund XXIII (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-----