|
|
 | | | |
- close
- close
- close
- close
| |||||||||
This excerpt taken from the EQR 10-Q filed May 8, 2008. Commitments and Contingencies
The Company, as an owner of real estate, is subject to various Federal, state and local environmental laws. Compliance by the Company with existing laws has not had a material adverse effect on the Company. However, the Company cannot predict the impact of new or changed laws or regulations on its current properties or on properties that it may acquire in the future.
The Company is party to a housing discrimination lawsuit brought by a non-profit civil rights organization in April 2006 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The suit alleges that the Company designed and built approximately 300 of its properties in violation of the accessibility requirements of
19
the Fair Housing Act and Americans with Disabilities Act. The suit seeks actual and punitive damages, injunctive relief (including modification of non-compliant properties), costs and attorneys’ fees. The Company believes it has a number of viable defenses, including that a majority of the named properties were completed before the operative dates of the statutes in question and/or were not designed or built by the Company. Accordingly, the Company is defending the suit vigorously. Due to the pendency of the Company’s defenses and the uncertainty of many other critical factual and legal issues, it is not possible to determine or predict the outcome of the suit and as a result, no amounts have been accrued at March 31, 2008. While no assurances can be given, the Company does not believe that the suit, if adversely determined, would have a material adverse effect on the Company.
The Company does not believe there is any other litigation pending or threatened against it that, individually or in the aggregate, reasonably may be expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company.
During the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, the Company established a reserve and recorded a corresponding expense, net of insurance receivables, for estimated uninsured property damage at certain of its properties caused by various hurricanes in each respective year. During the quarter ended March 31, 2008, the Company received the remaining accrued receivable of $1.8 million. As of March 31, 2008, the remaining reserve balance is $0.7 million and is included in other liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets.
As of March 31, 2008, the Company has 13 projects totaling 4,484 units in various stages of development with estimated completion dates ranging through June 30, 2011. Some of the projects are developed solely by the Company, while others are co-developed with various third party development partners. The development venture agreements with partners are primarily deal-specific, with differing terms regarding profit-sharing, equity contributions, returns on investment, buy-sell agreements and other customary provisions. The partner is most often the “general” or “managing” partner of the development venture. The typical buy-sell arrangements contain appraisal rights and provisions that provide the right, but not the obligation, for the Company to acquire the partner’s interest in the project at fair market value upon the expiration of a negotiated time period (typically two to five years after substantial completion of the project). However, the buy-sell provisions with one partner covering three projects does require the Company to purchase the partner’s interest in the projects at fair market value five years following the receipt of the final certificate of occupancy on the last developed property (in Q1 2009).
This excerpt taken from the EQR 10-Q filed Nov 7, 2007. Commitments and Contingencies
The Company, as an owner of real estate, is subject to various Federal, state and local environmental laws. Compliance by the Company with existing laws has not had a material adverse effect on the Company. However, the Company cannot predict the impact of new or changed laws or regulations on its current properties or on properties that it may acquire in the future.
20
The Company is party to a housing discrimination lawsuit brought by a non-profit civil rights organization in April 2006 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The suit alleges that the Company designed and built approximately 300 of its properties in violation of the accessibility requirements of the Fair Housing Act and Americans with Disabilities Act. The suit seeks actual and punitive damages, injunctive relief (including modification of non-compliant properties), costs and attorneys’ fees. The Company believes it has a number of viable defenses, including that a majority of the named properties were completed before the operative dates of the statutes in question and/or were not designed or built by the Company. Accordingly, the Company is defending the suit vigorously. Due to the pendency of the Company’s defenses and the uncertainty of many other critical factual and legal issues, it is not possible to determine or predict the outcome of the suit and as a result, no amounts have been accrued at September 30, 2007. While no assurances can be given, the Company does not believe that the suit, if adversely determined, will have a material adverse effect on the Company.
The Company does not believe there is any other litigation pending or threatened against it that, individually or in the aggregate, reasonably may be expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company.
During the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, the Company established a reserve and recorded a corresponding expense, net of insurance receivables, for estimated uninsured property damage at certain of its properties caused by various hurricanes in each respective year. During the nine months ended September 30, 2007, the Company received $5.6 million in insurance proceeds and recorded an additional $3.9 million of receivables in anticipation of proceeds expected. As of September 30, 2007, a receivable of $3.4 million and a liability of $1.4 million are included in other assets and other liabilities, respectively, on the consolidated balance sheets.
As of September 30, 2007, the Company has eleven projects totaling 3,289 units in various stages of development with estimated completion dates ranging through June 30, 2010. Some of the projects are developed solely by the Company, while others are co-developed with various third party development partners. The development venture agreements with partners are primarily deal-specific, with differing terms regarding profit-sharing, equity contributions, returns on investment, buy-sell agreements and other customary provisions. The partner is most often the “general” or “managing” partner of the development venture. The typical buy-sell arrangements contain appraisal rights and provisions that provide the right, but not the obligation, for the Company to acquire the partner’s interest in the project at fair market value upon the expiration of a negotiated time period (typically two to five years after substantial completion of the project). However, the buy-sell provisions with one partner covering three projects does require the Company to purchase the partner’s interest in the projects at fair market value five years following the receipt of the final certificate of occupancy on the last developed property.
This excerpt taken from the EQR 10-Q filed Aug 7, 2007. Commitments and Contingencies
The Company, as an owner of real estate, is subject to various Federal, state and local environmental laws. Compliance by the Company with existing laws has not had a material adverse effect on the Company. However, the Company cannot predict the impact of new or changed laws or regulations on its current properties or on properties that it may acquire in the future.
19
The Company is party to a housing discrimination lawsuit brought by a non-profit civil rights organization in April 2006 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The suit alleges that the Company designed and built approximately 300 of its properties in violation of the accessibility requirements of the Fair Housing Act and Americans With Disabilities Act. The suit seeks actual and punitive damages, injunctive relief (including modification of non-compliant properties), costs and attorneys’ fees. The Company believes it has a number of viable defenses, including that a majority of the named properties were completed before the operative dates of the statutes in question and/or were not designed or built by the Company. Accordingly, the Company is defending the suit vigorously. Due to the pendency of the Company’s defenses and the uncertainty of many other critical factual and legal issues, it is not possible to determine or predict the outcome of the suit and as a result, no amounts have been accrued at June 30, 2007. While no assurances can be given, the Company does not believe that the suit, if adversely determined, will have a material adverse effect on the Company. The Company does not believe there is any other litigation pending or threatened against it that, individually or in the aggregate, reasonably may be expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company. During the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, the Company established a reserve and recorded a corresponding expense, net of insurance receivables, for estimated uninsured property damage at certain of its properties caused by various hurricanes in each respective year. During the six months ended June 30, 2007, the Company received $3.8 million in insurance proceeds and recorded an additional $2.8 million of receivables in anticipation of proceeds expected. As of June 30, 2007, a receivable of $4.1 million and a liability of $1.7 million are included in other assets and other liabilities, respectively, on the consolidated balance sheets. As of June 30, 2007, the Company has nine projects totaling 3,026 units in various stages of development with estimated completion dates ranging through September 30, 2009. Some of the projects are developed solely by the Company, while others are co-developed with various third party development partners. The development venture agreements with partners are primarily deal-specific, with differing terms regarding profit-sharing, equity contributions, returns on investment, buy-sell agreements and other customary provisions. The partner is most often the “general” or “managing” partner of the development venture. The typical buy-sell arrangements contain appraisal rights and provisions that provide the right, but not the obligation, for the Company to acquire the partner’s interest in the project at fair market value upon the expiration of a negotiated time period (typically two to five years after substantial completion of the project). However, the buy-sell provisions with one partner covering three projects does require the Company to purchase the partner’s interest in the projects at fair market value five years following the receipt of the final certificate of occupancy on the last developed property. This excerpt taken from the EQR 10-Q filed May 9, 2007. Commitments and Contingencies
The Company, as an owner of real estate, is subject to various Federal, state and local environmental laws. 18 Compliance by the Company with existing laws has not had a material adverse effect on the Company. However, the Company cannot predict the impact of new or changed laws or regulations on its current properties or on properties that it may acquire in the future. The Company is party to a housing discrimination lawsuit brought by a non-profit civil rights organization in April 2006 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The suit alleges that the Company designed and built approximately 300 of its properties in violation of the accessibility requirements of the Fair Housing Act and Americans With Disabilities Act. The suit seeks actual and punitive damages, injunctive relief (including modification of non-compliant properties), costs and attorneys’ fees. The Company believes it has a number of viable defenses, including that a majority of the named properties were completed before the operative dates of the statutes in question and/or were not designed or built by the Company. Accordingly, the Company is defending the suit vigorously. Due to the pendency of the Company’s defenses and the uncertainty of many other critical factual and legal issues, it is not possible to determine or predict the outcome of the suit and as a result, no amounts have been accrued at March 31, 2007. While no assurances can be given, the Company does not believe that the suit, if adversely determined, will have a material adverse effect on the Company. The Company does not believe there is any other litigation pending or threatened against it that, individually or in the aggregate, reasonably may be expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company. During the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, the Company established a reserve and recorded a corresponding expense, net of insurance receivables, for estimated uninsured property damage at certain of its properties caused by various hurricanes in each respective year. During the quarter ended March 31, 2007, the Company received $3.8 million in insurance proceeds and recorded an additional $2.8 million of receivables in anticipation of proceeds expected. As of March 31, 2007, a receivable of $4.1 million and a liability of $2.5 million are included in other assets and other liabilities, respectively, on the consolidated balance sheets. This excerpt taken from the EQR 10-Q filed Nov 6, 2006. Commitments and Contingencies
The Company, as an owner of real estate, is subject to various Federal, state and local environmental laws. Compliance by the Company with existing laws has not had a material adverse effect on the Company. However, the Company cannot predict the impact of new or changed laws or regulations on its current properties or on properties that it may acquire in the future. The Company is party to a housing discrimination lawsuit brought in April of 2006 in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. The suit alleges that the Company designed and built approximately 300 of the Company’s properties in violation of the accessibility requirements of the Fair Housing Act and Americans With Disabilities Act. The suit seeks actual and punitive damages, injunctive relief (including modification of non-compliant properties), costs and attorneys’ fees. The Company believes it has a number of viable defenses, including that a majority of the named properties were completed before the operative dates of the statutes in question and/or were not designed or built by the Company. Accordingly, the Company is defending the suit vigorously. Due to the pendency of the Company’s defenses and the uncertainty of many other critical factual and legal issues, it is not possible to determine or predict the outcome of the suit and as a result, no amounts have been accrued at September 30, 2006. While no assurances can be given, the Company does not believe that the suit, if adversely determined, will have a material adverse effect on the Company. The Company does not believe there is any other litigation pending or threatened against the Company which, individually or in the aggregate, reasonably may be expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company. During the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, the Company established a reserve and recorded a corresponding expense, net of insurance receivables, for estimated uninsured property damage at certain of its properties caused by various hurricanes in each respective year. During the nine months ended September 30, 2006, the Company received $11.0 million in insurance proceeds and recorded an additional $5.8 million of receivables in anticipation of proceeds expected. As of September 30, 2006, a receivable of $5.9 million and a liability of $3.7 million are included in other assets and rents received in advance and
20
other liabilities, respectively, on the consolidated balance sheets. This excerpt taken from the EQR 10-Q filed Aug 7, 2006. Commitments and Contingencies
The Company, as an owner of real estate, is subject to various Federal, state and local environmental laws. Compliance by the Company with existing laws has not had a material adverse effect on the Company. However, the Company cannot predict the impact of new or changed laws or regulations on its current properties or on properties that it may acquire in the future. The Company is party to a housing discrimination lawsuit brought in April of 2006 in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. The suit alleges that the Company designed and built approximately 300 of the Company’s properties in violation of the accessibility requirements of the Fair Housing Act and Americans With Disabilities Act. The suit seeks actual and punitive damages, injunctive relief (including modification of non-compliant properties), costs and attorneys’ fees. The Company believes it has a number of viable defenses, including that a majority of the named properties were completed before the operative dates of the statutes in question and/or were not designed or built by the Company. Accordingly, the Company is defending the suit vigorously. Due to the pendency of the Company’s defenses and the uncertainty of many other critical factual and legal issues, it is not possible to determine or predict the outcome of the suit and as a result, no amounts have been accrued at June 30, 2006. While no assurances can be given, the Company does not believe that the suit, if adversely determined, will have a material adverse effect on the Company. The Company does not believe there is any other litigation pending or threatened against the Company which, individually or in the aggregate, reasonably may be expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company. During the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, the Company established a reserve and recorded a corresponding expense, net of insurance receivables, for estimated uninsured property damage at certain of its properties caused by various hurricanes in each respective year. During the six months ended June 30, 2006, the Company received $9.1 million in insurance proceeds and recorded an additional $3.8 million of receivables in anticipation of proceeds expected. As of June 30, 2006, a receivable of $5.8 million and reserve of $8.5 million are included in other assets and rents received in advance and other liabilities, respectively, on the consolidated balance sheets. This excerpt taken from the EQR 10-Q filed May 8, 2006. 14. Commitments and Contingencies The Company, as an owner of real estate, is subject to various Federal, state and local environmental laws. Compliance by the Company with existing laws has not had a material adverse effect on the Company. However, the Company cannot predict the impact of new or changed laws or regulations on its current properties or on properties that it may acquire in the future. The Company does not believe there is any litigation pending or threatened against the Company which, individually or in the aggregate, reasonably may be expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company. During the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, the Company established a reserve and recorded a corresponding expense, net of insurance receivables, for estimated uninsured property damage at certain of its properties caused by various hurricanes in each respective year. During the quarter ended March 31, 2006, the Company received $4.0 million in insurance proceeds and recorded an additional $2.9 million of receivables in anticipation of proceeds expected. As of March 31, 2006, a receivable of $10.0 million and reserve of $13.4 million are included in other assets and rents received in advance and other liabilities, respectively, on the consolidated balance sheets. As of March 31, 2006, the Company has six projects totaling 1,711 units in various stages of development with estimated completion dates ranging through June 30, 2008. The primary development agreements currently in place have the following key terms: · The first development partner has the right, at any time following completion of a project subject to the agreement, to stipulate a value for such project and offer to sell its interest in the project to the Company based on such value. If the Company chooses not to purchase the interest, the Company must agree to a sale of the project to an unrelated third party at such value. The Company’s partner must exercise this right as to all projects subject to the agreement within five years after the receipt of the final certificate of occupancy on the last developed property. In connection with this development agreement, the Company has an obligation to provide up to $40.0 million in credit enhancements to guarantee a portion of the third party construction financing. As of May 3, 2006, the Company did not have any amounts outstanding related to this credit enhancement. The Company would be required to perform under this agreement only if there was a material default under a third party construction mortgage agreement. This agreement expires no later than December 31, 2018. Notwithstanding the termination of the agreement, the Company shall have recourse against its development partner for any losses incurred. · The second development partner has the right, at any time following completion of a project subject to the agreement, to require the Company to purchase the partners’ interest in that project at a mutually agreeable price. If the Company and the partner are unable to agree on a price, both parties will obtain appraisals. If the appraised values vary by more than 10%, both the Company and its partner will agree on a third appraiser to determine which original appraisal is closest to its determination of value. The Company may elect at that time not to purchase the property and instead, authorize its partner to sell the project at or above the agreed-upon value to an unrelated third party. Five years following the receipt of the final certificate of occupancy on the last developed property, the Company must purchase, at the agreed-upon price, any projects remaining unsold. · The third development partner has the exclusive right for six months following stabilization, as defined, to market a subject project for sale. Thereafter, either the Company or its development partner may market a subject project for sale. If the Company’s development partner proposes the sale, the Company may elect to purchase the project at the price proposed by its partner or defer the sale until two independent appraisers appraise the project. If the two appraised values vary by more than 5%, a third appraiser will be chosen to determine the fair market value of the property. Once a value has been determined, the Company may elect to purchase the property or authorize its 19 development partner to sell the project at the agreed-upon value. This excerpt taken from the EQR 10-Q filed May 9, 2005. 14. Commitments and Contingencies
The Company, as an owner of real estate, is subject to various Federal, state and local environmental laws. Compliance by the Company with existing laws has not had a material adverse effect on the Company. However, the Company cannot predict the impact of new or changed laws or regulations on its current properties or on properties that it may acquire in the future.
In August 2004, the Company tried a class action lawsuit in Palm Beach County, Florida regarding certain charges made to residents who terminated their leases early or failed to provide sufficient notice of intent to vacate. In December 2004, the Court issued a Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law holding those fees legally uncollectible under Florida law. In recognition of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, which awarded damages and interest to the class in the amount of approximately $1.6 million, the Company established a reserve of approximately $1.6 million and correspondingly recorded this as a general and administrative expense in December 2004. Due to pending appeals, the award is neither final nor enforceable. Accordingly, it is not possible to determine or predict the ultimate outcome of the case. While no assurances can be given, the Company does not believe that this lawsuit, if the ultimate outcome is unfavorable, will have a material adverse effect on the Company.
The Company does not believe there is any other litigation pending or threatened against the Company which, individually or in the aggregate, reasonably may be expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company.
19
During the year ended December 31, 2004, the Company established a reserve and recorded a corresponding expense of $15.2 million for estimated uninsured property damage at certain of its properties primarily located in Florida caused by Hurricanes Charley, Frances, Ivan and Jeanne. Of this amount, approximately $12.9 million had been spent for hurricane related repairs through March 31, 2005. The $2.3 million remaining reserve is included in rents received in advance and other liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets.
| EXCERPTS ON THIS PAGE:
RELATED TOPICS for EQR:
|
| |||||||
