UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2004

or

[  ] TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from                     to                    .

Commission file numbers:
333-75415
333-75415-03

CC V Holdings, LLC*

(314) 965-0555

Indicate by check mark whether the registrants: (1) have filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrants were required to file such reports), and (2) have been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes [X] No [  ]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrants are accelerated filers (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes [  ] No [X]

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity securities held by non-affiliates as of June 30, 2003 was $0. All of the issued and outstanding shares of capital stock of CC V Holdings Finance, Inc. are held by CC V Holdings, LLC. All of the limited liability company membership interests of CC V Holdings, LLC are held indirectly by Charter Communications Holdings, LLC, a reporting company under the Exchange Act. There is no public trading market for any of the aforementioned limited liability company membership interests or shares of capital stock.

* Registrants meet the conditions set forth in General Instruction (H)(1)(a) and (b) to the Form 10-Q and are therefore filing with the reduced disclosure format.

CC V HOLDINGS, LLC
CC V HOLDINGS FINANCE, INC.

FORM 10-Q
QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 2004

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Note: Separate financial statements of CC V Holdings Finance, Inc. have not been presented as this entity had no operations and significantly no assets or equity during the periods reported. Accordingly, management has determined that such financial statements are not material.

This quarterly report on Form 10-Q is for the three and six months ended June 30, 2004. The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) allows us to “incorporate by reference” information that we file with the SEC, which means that we can disclose important information to you by referring you directly to those documents. Information incorporated by reference is considered to be part of this quarterly report. In addition, information that we file with the SEC in the future will automatically update and supersede information contained in this quarterly report. In this quarterly report, “we,” “us” and “our” refer to CC V Holdings, LLC and its subsidiaries.

CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS:

This quarterly report includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), regarding, among other things, our plans, strategies and prospects, both business and financial including, without limitation, the forward-looking statements set forth in the “Results of Operations” and “Liquidity and Capital Resources” sections under Part I, Item 2. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in this quarterly report. Although we believe that our plans, intentions and expectations reflected in or suggested by these forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot assure you that we will achieve or realize these plans, intentions or expectations. Forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions including, without limitation, the factors described under “Certain Trends and Uncertainties” under Part I, Item 2. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in this quarterly report. Many of the forward-looking statements contained in this quarterly report may be identified by the use of forward-looking words such as “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “should,” “planned,” “will,” “may,” “intend,” “estimated” and “potential,” among others. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements we make in this quarterly report are set forth in this quarterly report and in other reports or documents that we file from time to time with the SEC, and include, but are not limited to:

•

our ability to sustain and grow revenues and cash flows from operating activities by offering video, high-speed data, telephony and other services and to maintain a stable customer base, particularly in the face of increasingly aggressive competition from other service providers;

	•		our and our parent companies’ ability to pay or refinance debt as it becomes due;
	•		the availability of funds to meet interest payment obligations under our and our parent companies’ debt and to fund our operations and necessary capital expenditures, either through cash flows from operating activities, further borrowings or other sources;

•

any adverse consequences arising out of our restatement of our 2000, 2001 and 2002 financial statements;

•

the results of the pending grand jury investigation by the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Missouri, and the ability to reach a final approved settlement with respect to the putative class action, the unconsolidated state action, and derivative shareholders litigation against Charter Communications, Inc., our indirect parent, on the terms of the memoranda of understanding described herein;

•

our ability to comply with all covenants in our indentures and credit facilities, any violation of which would result in a violation of the applicable facility or indenture and could trigger a default of other obligations of our affiliates under cross-default provisions;

•

our ability to obtain programming at reasonable prices or to pass cost increases on to our customers;

•

general business conditions, economic uncertainty or slowdown; and

•

the effects of governmental regulation, including but not limited to local franchise taxing authorities, on our business.

All forward-looking statements attributable to us or a person acting on our behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by this cautionary statement. We are under no duty or obligation to update any of the forward-looking statements after the date of this quarterly report.

3

PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION.

CC V HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.

4

CC V HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS)
(UNAUDITED)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.

5

CC V HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS)
(UNAUDITED)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.

6

CC V HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT WHERE INDICATED)

1. Organization and Basis of Presentation

The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements of CC V Holdings, LLC include the accounts of CC V Holdings, LLC and all of its wholly owned subsidiaries including CC VIII Operating, LLC (collectively, the “Company”). The Company is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Charter Communications Operating, LLC (“Charter Operating”), which is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Charter Communications Holdings, LLC (“Charter Holdings”). Charter Holdings is a wholly owned subsidiary of Charter Communications Holding Company, LLC (“Charter Holdco”), which is a subsidiary of Charter Communications, Inc. (“Charter”). All significant intercompany accounts and transactions among consolidated entities have been eliminated.

As of June 30, 2004, the Company owns and operates cable systems serving approximately 924,900 customers. The Company offers its customers traditional cable video programming (analog and digital video) as well as high-speed data services and, in some areas, advanced broadband services such as video on demand. The Company sells its cable video programming, high-speed data and advanced broadband services on a subscription basis. The Company operates primarily in the states of Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin and in the New England area.

Charter Holdco and Charter, the Company’s managers and indirect parents, provide management services for the cable systems owned or operated by the Company. The management services include such services as centralized customer billing services, data processing and related support, benefits administration and coordination of insurance coverage and self-insurance programs for medical, dental and workers’ compensation claims. Costs associated with providing these services are billed and charged directly to the Company and are included within operating costs in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations.

The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements of the Company have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States for interim financial information and the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Accordingly, certain information and footnote disclosures typically included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K have been condensed or omitted for this quarterly report. The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements are unaudited and are subject to review by regulatory authorities. However, in the opinion of management, such financial statements include all adjustments, which consist of only normal recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation of the results for the periods presented. Interim results are not necessarily indicative of results for a full year.

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Areas involving significant judgments and estimates include capitalization of labor and overhead costs; depreciation and amortization costs; impairments of property, plant and equipment and franchises and contingencies. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Reclassifications. Certain 2003 amounts have been reclassified to conform with the 2004 presentation.

2. Liquidity and Capital Resources

The Company recognized income from operations of $18 million and $41 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2004, respectively, and $31 million and $53 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2003, respectively. The Company’s net cash flows from operating activities were $96 million and $52 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004 and 2003, respectively. The Company has historically required significant cash to fund capital expenditures and debt service costs. Historically, the Company has funded these requirements through cash flows from operating activities, borrowings under the credit facilities of the Company’s subsidiary, equity contributions from our parent companies, borrowings from related parties and cash on hand. The mix of funding sources changes from period to period, but for the six months ended June 30, 2004, approximately 100% of the Company’s funding requirements were from cash flows from operating activities.

7

CC V HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT WHERE INDICATED)

The Company expects that cash on hand and cash flows from operating activities will be adequate to meet its 2004 cash needs. As of June 30, 2004, the Company held $25 million in cash and cash equivalents.

The Company expects that it will rely on capital contributions from its parent companies to repay the principal amount of its public notes at maturity. However, there can be no assurance that its parent companies will have sufficient liquidity to satisfy this payment when due. The Company’s parent companies have a significant amount of debt. Any financial or liquidity problems of the parent companies would likely cause serious disruption to the Company’s business and have a material adverse effect on its business and results of operations. Any such event would likely adversely impact the Company’s credit rating, and its relations with customers and suppliers, which could in turn further impair its ability to obtain financing and operate its business. In addition, a default under the covenants governing any of the Company’s indentures could result in the acceleration of the Company’s payment obligations under its debt and, under certain circumstances, in cross-defaults under its affiliates’ debt obligations, which could adversely affect its parent companies’ ability to provide the Company with funding.

If the Company’s business does not generate sufficient cash flow from operating activities, and sufficient future distributions are not available to the Company from other sources of financing, it may not be able to repay its debt, grow its business, respond to competitive challenges, or to fund its other liquidity and capital needs.

In April 2004, Charter Operating sold senior second lien notes and amended and restated its own credit facilities and used the additional borrowings under the amended and restated credit facilities, together with proceeds from the sale of the notes, to refinance the credit facilities of its subsidiaries, including the CC VIII Operating credit facilities. The effect of the transaction, among other things, was to substitute Charter Operating as the lender in place of the banks under the CC VIII Operating credit facilities. In connection with the transaction, all principal payments prior to maturity were eliminated from the CC VIII Operating credit facilities, and all amounts then outstanding (approximately $1.0 billion principal amount) will become payable at maturity (extended from June 2007 and February 2008 to October 2011). Outstanding borrowings under the CC VIII Operating credit facilities bear interest, at CC VIII Operating’s election, at a base rate or the Eurodollar rate, as defined, plus a margin of 3.0% for Eurodollar loans and 2.0% for base rate loans. CC VIII Operating’s obligations under the credit facilities continue to be guaranteed by its immediate parent company, CC VIII Holdings, LLC, and by the subsidiaries of CC VIII Operating other than immaterial subsidiaries, and to be secured by pledges of equity interests and intercompany notes held by CC VIII Operating and the guarantors under the CC VIII Operating credit facilities.

The CC VIII Operating credit facilities continues to contain typical representations and warranties, affirmative covenants, reporting requirements, and negative covenants, except that the facilities no longer contains financial covenants that measure performance against standards set for leverage, debt service coverage, or operating cash flow coverage of cash interest expense. In addition, the facilities now provides that an event of default under the amended and restated Charter Operating credit facilities is a default under the CC VIII Operating credit facilities.

In addition, in connection with the amendment and restatement of the Charter Operating credit facilities, a requirement was imposed that the CC V Holdings, LLC senior discount notes be redeemed within 45 days after Charter Holdings’ leverage ratio (determined under the indentures governing the senior notes and senior discount notes issued by Charter Holdings) is determined to be below 8.75 to 1.0, provided the ratio then remains below that level after giving effect to the redemption. As of June 30, 2004, Charter Holdings’ leverage ratio was above 8.75 to 1.0.

3. Franchises

On January 1, 2002, the Company adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 142, which eliminates the amortization of indefinite lived intangible assets. Accordingly, beginning January 1, 2002, all franchises that qualify for indefinite life treatment under SFAS No. 142 are no longer amortized against earnings but instead are tested for impairment annually, or more frequently as warranted by events or changes in circumstances. Based on the guidance prescribed in Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Issue No. 02-7, Unit of Accounting for Testing of Impairment of Indefinite-Lived Intangible Assets, franchises are aggregated into essentially inseparable asset groups to conduct the valuations. The asset groups generally represented geographic clusters of the Company’s cable systems by which the Company manages its operating assets, which management believes represents the highest and best use of those assets. Fair value is determined based on estimated discounted future cash flows using assumptions that are consistent with internal forecasts.

8

CC V HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT WHERE INDICATED)

As of June 30, 2004 and December 31, 2003, indefinite-lived and finite-lived intangible assets are presented in the following table:

In the first quarter of 2004, approximately $10 million of franchises that were previously classified as finite-lived were reclassified to indefinite-lived, based on the Company’s ability in 2003 to renew these franchise assets. Franchise amortization expense for the three and six months ended June 30, 2004 was $0.2 million and $0.5 million, respectively, and franchise amortization expense for the three and six months ended June 30, 2003 was $0.6 million and $1 million, respectively, which represents the amortization relating to franchises that did not qualify for indefinite-life treatment under SFAS No. 142, including costs associated with franchise renewals. Franchise renewals are amortized on a straight-line basis over 10 years. The Company expects that amortization expense on franchise assets will be approximately $1 million annually. Actual amortization expense to be reported in future periods could differ from these estimates as a result of new intangible asset acquisitions or divestitures, changes in useful lives and other relevant factors.

4. Accounts Payable and Accrued Expenses

Accounts payable and accrued expenses consist of the following as of June 30, 2004 and December 31, 2003:

5. Long-Term Debt

Long-term debt consists of the following as of June 30, 2004 and December 31, 2003:

As described in note 2 above, Charter Operating engaged in a financing transaction in April 2004, which resulted, among other things, in Charter Operating being substituted as the lender in place of the banks under the CC VIII Operating credit facilities.

9

CC V HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT WHERE INDICATED)

6. Comprehensive Income (Loss)

The Company reports changes in the fair value of interest rate agreements designated as hedging the variability of cash flows associated with floating-rate debt obligations, that meet the effectiveness criteria of SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). For the three months ended June 30, 2004 and 2003, comprehensive income was $11 million and comprehensive loss was $0.3 million, respectively. For the six months ended June 30, 2004 and 2003, comprehensive income was $6 million and comprehensive loss was $8 million, respectively.

7. Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities

The Company uses interest rate risk management derivative instruments, such as interest rate swap agreements and interest rate collar agreements (collectively referred to herein as interest rate agreements) to manage its interest costs. The Company’s policy is to manage interest costs using a mix of fixed and variable rate debt. Using interest rate swap agreements, the Company has agreed to exchange, at specified intervals through 2007, the difference between fixed and variable interest amounts calculated by reference to an agreed-upon notional principal amount. Interest rate collar agreements are used to limit the Company’s exposure to and benefits from interest rate fluctuations on variable rate debt to within a certain range of rates.

The Company does not hold or issue derivative instruments for trading purposes. The Company does, however, have certain interest rate derivative instruments that have been designated as cash flow hedging instruments. Such instruments are those that effectively convert variable interest payments on certain debt instruments into fixed payments. For qualifying hedges, SFAS No. 133 allows derivative gains and losses to offset related results on hedged items in the condensed consolidated statement of operations. The Company has formally documented, designated and assessed the effectiveness of transactions that receive hedge accounting. For the three months ended June 30, 2004 and 2003, net gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities includes a gain of $2 million and $0.2 million, respectively, and for the six months ended June 30, 2004 and 2003, net gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities includes a gain of $0.4 million and $0.1 million, respectively, which represent cash flow hedge ineffectiveness on interest rate hedge agreements arising from differences between the critical terms of the agreements and the related hedged obligations. Changes in the fair value of interest rate agreements designated as hedging instruments of the variability of cash flows associated with floating-rate debt obligations that meet the effectiveness criteria of SFAS No. 133 are reported in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). For the three and six months ended June 30, 2004, a gain of $5 million and $5 million, respectively, and for the three and six months ended June 30, 2003, a loss of $2 million and $3 million, respectively, related to derivative instruments designated as cash flow hedges was recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). The amounts are subsequently reclassified into interest expense as a yield adjustment in the same period in which the related interest on the floating-rate debt obligations affects earnings (losses).

Certain interest rate derivative instruments are not designated as hedges as they do not meet the effectiveness criteria specified by SFAS No. 133. However, management believes such instruments are closely correlated with the respective debt, thus managing associated risk. Interest rate derivative instruments not designated as hedges are marked to fair value with the impact recorded as a gain or loss on interest rate agreements. For the three months ended June 30, 2004 and 2003, net gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities includes gains of $18 million and losses of $4 million, respectively, and for the six months ended June 30, 2004 and 2003, net gain (loss) on derivative instruments and hedging activities includes gains of $14 million and losses of $4 million, respectively, for interest rate derivative instruments not designated as hedges.

As of June 30, 2004 and December 31, 2003, the Company had outstanding $700 million in notional amounts of interest rate swaps. The notional amounts of interest rate instruments do not represent amounts exchanged by the parties and, thus, are not a measure of exposure to credit loss. The amounts exchanged are determined by reference to the notional amount and the other terms of the contracts.

10

CC V HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT WHERE INDICATED)

8. Special Charges

In the fourth quarter of 2002, the Company recorded a special charge of $3 million associated with the Company’s workforce reduction program and the consolidation of its operations from two divisions and two regions into one operating division, elimination of redundant practices and streamlining its management structure. During the year ended December 31, 2003, additional severance related costs of $0.3 million were incurred and recorded as a special charge. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2004, additional employees were identified for termination, and severance costs of $47 thousand and $0.2 million, respectively, were recorded in special charges. Payments are made over a period of up to two years with approximately $0.1 million and $0.5 million paid during the three and six months ended June 30, 2004, respectively, and $3 million paid during the year ended December 31, 2003. As of June 30, 2004 and December 31, 2003, a liability of approximately $0 and $0.3 million, respectively, is recorded on the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets related to the reorganization activities discussed above. For the six months ended June 30, 2004, special charges also includes approximately $13 million, which represents the allocation to the Company of expenses for the aggregate value of the Charter Class A common stock and warrants to purchase Charter Class A common stock contemplated to be issued as part of the terms set forth in memoranda of understanding regarding settlement of the consolidated Federal Class Action and Federal Derivative Action and approximately $0.9 million of litigation costs related to the tentative settlement of the South Carolina national class action suit, all of which settlements are subject to final documentation and court approval (see note 10).

During the three and six months ended June 30, 2003, the Company recorded severance costs of $0.8 million and $0.2 million, respectively, in special charges. For the six months ended June 30, 2003, the severance costs were offset by a $0.3 million settlement from the Internet service provider Excite@Home related to the conversion of approximately 145,000 high-speed data customers to our Charter Pipeline service in 2001. In addition, for the six months ended June 30, 2003, the Company reversed $0.3 million of the severance accrual that was determined to be excessive.

9. Income Taxes

The Company is a single member limited liability company not subject to income tax. The Company holds all operations through indirect subsidiaries. The majority of these indirect subsidiaries are limited liability companies that are also not subject to income tax. However, certain of the Company’s indirect subsidiaries are corporations and are subject to income tax.

As of June 30, 2004 and December 31, 2003, the Company had net deferred income tax liabilities of approximately $20 million. These relate to certain of the Company’s indirect subsidiaries, which file separate income tax returns.

During the three months ended June 30, 2004 and 2003, the Company recorded $1 million and $0.4 million of income tax expense, respectively. During the six months ended June 30, 2004 and 2003, the Company recorded $2 million and $0.9 million of income tax expense, respectively. The income tax expense recognized relates to increases in the deferred tax liabilities and current federal and state income tax expenses of certain of the Company’s indirect corporate subsidiaries.

Charter Holdco is currently under examination by the Internal Revenue Service for the tax years ending December 31, 1999 and 2000. Management does not expect the results of this examination to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial position or results of operations.

10. Contingencies

Fourteen putative federal class action lawsuits (the ''Federal Class Actions’’) have been filed against Charter and certain of its former and present officers and directors in various jurisdictions allegedly on behalf of all purchasers of Charter’s securities during the period from either November 8 or November 9, 1999 through July 17 or July 18, 2002. Unspecified damages are sought by the plaintiffs. In general, the lawsuits allege that Charter utilized misleading accounting practices and failed to disclose these accounting practices and/or issued false and misleading financial statements and press releases concerning Charter’s operations and prospects. The Federal Class Actions

11

CC V HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT WHERE INDICATED)

were specifically and individually identified in public filings made by Charter prior to the date of this quarterly report.

In October 2002, Charter filed a motion with the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (the ''Panel’’) to transfer the Federal Class Actions to the Eastern District of Missouri. On March 12, 2003, the Panel transferred the six Federal Class Actions not filed in the Eastern District of Missouri to that district for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings with the eight Federal Class Actions already pending there. The Panel’s transfer order assigned the Federal Class Actions to Judge Charles A. Shaw. By virtue of a prior court order, StoneRidge Investment Partners LLC became lead plaintiff upon entry of the Panel’s transfer order. StoneRidge subsequently filed a Consolidated Amended Complaint. The Court subsequently consolidated the Federal Class Actions into a single consolidated action (the ''Consolidated Federal Class Action’’) for pretrial purposes. On June 19, 2003, following a status and scheduling conference with the parties, the Court issued a Case Management Order setting forth a schedule for the pretrial phase of the Consolidated Federal Class Action. Motions to dismiss the Consolidated Amended Complaint were filed. On February 10, 2004, in response to a joint motion made by StoneRidge and defendants, Charter, Vogel and Allen, the Court entered an order providing, among other things, that: (1) the parties who filed such motion, engage in a mediation within ninety (90) days; and (2) all proceedings in the Consolidated Federal Class Actions were stayed until May 10, 2004. On May 11, 2004, the Court extended the stay in the Consolidated Federal Class Action for an additional sixty (60) days. On July 12, 2004, the parties submitted a joint motion to again extend the stay, this time until September 10, 2004. The Court granted that extension on July 20, 2004.

On September 12, 2002, a shareholders derivative suit (the ''State Derivative Action’’) was filed in the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, State of Missouri (the “Missouri State Court”), against Charter and its then current directors, as well as its former auditors. A substantively identical derivative action was later filed and consolidated into the State Derivative Action. The plaintiffs allege that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties by failing to establish and maintain adequate internal controls and procedures. Unspecified damages, allegedly on Charter’s behalf, are sought by the plaintiffs.

On March 12, 2004, an action substantively identical to the State Derivative Action was filed in the Missouri State Court, against Charter and certain of its current and former directors, as well as its former auditors. The plaintiffs allege that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties by failing to establish and maintain adequate internal controls and procedures. Unspecified damages, allegedly on Charter’s behalf, are sought by plaintiffs. On July 14, 2004, the Court consolidated this case with the State Derivative Action.

Separately, on February 12, 2003, a shareholders derivative suit (the ''Federal Derivative Action’’), was filed against Charter and its then current directors in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The plaintiff alleges that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties and grossly mismanaged Charter by failing to establish and maintain adequate internal controls and procedures. Unspecified damages, allegedly on Charter’s behalf, are sought by the plaintiffs.

On August 5, 2004, Charter entered into Memoranda of Understanding setting forth agreements in principle regarding settlement of the consolidated Federal Class Action and the Federal Derivative Action (the “Actions”). In exchange for a release of all claims by plaintiffs against Charter and its former and present officers and directors named in the Actions, Charter will pay to the plaintiffs a combination of cash and equity collectively valued at $144 million, which will include the fees and expenses of plaintiffs’ counsel. Of this amount, $64 million will be paid in cash (by Charter’s insurance carriers) and the balance will be paid in shares of Charter Class A common stock having an aggregate value of $40 million and ten-year warrants to purchase shares of Charter Class A common stock having an aggregate warrant value of $40 million. The warrants would have an exercise price equal to 150% of the fair market value (as defined) of Charter Class A common stock as of the date of the entry of the order of final judgment approving the settlement. In addition, Charter expects to issue additional shares of its Class A common stock to its insurance carrier having an aggregate value of $5 million. As a result, the Company recorded a $13 million special charge on its consolidated statement of operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2004 related to its portion of the expense allocation for the aggregate value of the Charter Class A common stock and warrants to be issued. The expense was allocated amongst Charter’s indirect operating subsidiaries pro rata based on analog video customers. Additionally, as part of the settlements, Charter will also commit to a variety of corporate governance changes, internal practices and public disclosures, some of which have already been

12

CC V HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT WHERE INDICATED)

undertaken and none of which are inconsistent with measures Charter is taking in connection with the recent conclusion of the SEC investigation described below. The settlement of each of the lawsuits is conditioned upon, among other things, the parties’ approval and execution of definitive settlement agreements with respect to the matters described above, judicial approval of the settlements by the Court following notice to the class, and dismissal of the consolidated derivative actions now pending in Missouri State Court, which are related to the Federal Derivative Action.

In addition to the Federal Class Actions, the State Derivative Action, the new Missouri State Court derivative action and the Federal Derivative Action, six putative class action lawsuits were filed against Charter and certain of its then current directors and officers in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (the ''Delaware Class Actions’’). The lawsuits were filed after the filing of a Schedule 13D amendment by Mr. Allen indicating that he was exploring a number of possible alternatives with respect to restructuring or expanding his ownership interest in Charter. Charter believes that the plaintiffs speculated that Mr. Allen might have been contemplating an unfair bid for shares of Charter or some other sort of going private transaction on unfair terms and generally alleged that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties by participating in or acquiescing to such a transaction. The lawsuits, which are substantively identical, were brought on behalf of Charter’s securities holders as of July 29, 2002, and sought unspecified damages and possible injunctive relief. However, Charter has informed the Company that no such transaction by Mr. Allen has been presented. On April 30, 2004, orders of dismissal without prejudice were entered in each of the Delaware Class Actions.

In August 2002, Charter became aware of a grand jury investigation being conducted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Missouri into certain of its accounting and reporting practices, focusing on how Charter reported customer numbers, and its reporting of amounts received from digital set-top terminal suppliers for advertising. The U.S. Attorney’s Office has publicly stated that Charter is not a target of the investigation. Charter has also been advised by the U. S. Attorney’s office that no member of its board of directors, including its Chief Executive Officer, is a target of the investigation. On July 24, 2003, a federal grand jury charged four former officers of Charter with conspiracy and mail and wire fraud, alleging improper accounting and reporting practices focusing on revenue from digital set-top terminal suppliers and inflated customer account numbers. On July 25, 2003, one of the former officers who was indicted entered a guilty plea. Charter has advised the Company that it is fully cooperating with the investigation.

On November 4, 2002, Charter received an informal, non-public inquiry from the staff of the SEC. The SEC issued a formal order of investigation dated January 23, 2003, and subsequently served document and testimony subpoenas on Charter and a number of its former employees. The investigation and subpoenas generally concerned Charter’s prior reports with respect to its determination of the number of customers, and various of its accounting policies and practices including its capitalization of certain expenses and dealings with certain vendors, including programmers and digital set-top terminal suppliers. On July 27, 2004, the SEC and Charter reached a final agreement to settle the investigation. In the Settlement Agreement and Cease and Desist Order, Charter agreed to entry of an administrative order prohibiting any future violations of United States securities laws and requiring certain other remedial internal practices and public disclosures. Charter neither admitted nor denied any wrongdoing, and the SEC assessed no fine against Charter.

Charter is generally required to indemnify each of the named individual defendants in connection with the matters described above pursuant to the terms of its bylaws and (where applicable) such individual defendants’ employment agreements. In accordance with these documents, in connection with the pending grand jury investigation, the now settled SEC investigation and the above described lawsuits, some of its current and former directors and Charter’s current and former officers have been advanced certain costs and expenses incurred in connection with their defense.

Charter has liability insurance coverage that it believes is available for the matters described above, where applicable, subject to the terms, conditions and limitations of the respective policies. There is no assurance that current coverage will be sufficient for all claims described above or any future claims that may arise.

In October 2001, two customers, Nikki Nicholls and Geraldine M. Barber, filed a class action suit against Charter Holdco in South Carolina Court of Common Pleas (''South Carolina Class Action’’), purportedly on behalf of a class of Charter Holdco’s customers, alleging that Charter Holdco improperly charged them a wire maintenance fee without request or permission. They also claimed that Charter Holdco improperly required them to rent analog

13

CC V HOLDINGS, LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT WHERE INDICATED)

and/or digital set-top terminals even though their television sets were ''cable ready.’’ A substantively identical case was filed in the Superior Court of Athens – Clarke County, Georgia by Emma S. Tobar on March 26, 2002 (the “Georgia Class Action”), alleging a nationwide class for these claims. Charter Holdco removed the South Carolina Class Action to the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina in November 2001, and moved to dismiss the suit in December 2001. The federal judge remanded the case to the South Carolina Court of Common Pleas in August 2002 without ruling on the motion to dismiss. The plaintiffs subsequently moved for a default judgment, arguing that upon return to state court, Charter Holdco should have but did not file a new motion to dismiss. The state court judge granted the plaintiff’s motion over Charter Holdco’s objection in September 2002. Charter Holdco immediately appealed that decision to the South Carolina Court of Appeals and the South Carolina Supreme Court, but those courts have ruled that until a final judgment is entered against Charter Holdco, they lack jurisdiction to hear the appeal.

In January 2003, the Court of Common Pleas granted the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. In October and November 2003, Charter Holdco filed motions (a) asking that court to set aside the default judgment, and (b) seeking dismissal of plaintiffs’ suit for failure to state a claim. In January 2004, the Court of Common Pleas granted in part and denied in part Charter Holdco’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. It also took under advisement Charter Holdco’s motion to set aside the default judgment. In April 2004, the parties to both the Georgia and South Carolina Class Actions participated in a mediation. The mediator made a proposal to the parties to settle the lawsuits. In May 2004, the parties accepted the mediator’s proposal and reached a tentative settlement, subject to final documentation and court approval. As a result of the tentative settlement, the Company recorded a special charge of $0.9 million in its consolidated statement of operations in the first quarter of 2004 (see note 8). On July 8, 2004, the Superior Court of Athens – Clarke County, Georgia granted a motion to amend the Tobar complaint to add Nicholls, Barber and April Jones as plaintiffs in the Georgia Class Action and to add any potential class members in South Carolina. The Court also granted preliminary approval of the proposed settlement on that date. A hearing to consider final approval of the settlement is scheduled to occur on November 10, 2004. On August 2, 2004, the parties submitted a joint request to the South Carolina Court of Common Pleas to stay the South Carolina Class Action pending final approval of the settlement. Charter is awaiting a ruling on that request.

Charter is unable to predict the outcome of the remaining lawsuits and the government investigation described above. An unfavorable outcome in any of these lawsuits or the government investigation could have a material adverse effect on the Company’