Back to GetFilings.com

Table of Contents

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

(Mark One)

For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2004

OR

For the transition period from                              to                             

Commission file number 0-17876

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND II-OW

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

(Former name, former address, and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has 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 registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

Yes x    No ¨

Table of Contents

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Certain statements contained in this Form 10-Q of Wells Real Estate Fund II-OW (the “Partnership”) other than historical facts may be considered forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Such statements include, in particular, statements about our plans, strategies, and prospects and are subject to certain risks and uncertainties, as well as known and unknown risks, which could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected or anticipated. Therefore, such statements are not intended to be a guarantee of our performance in future periods. Such forward-looking statements can generally be identified by our use of forward-looking terminology such as “may,” “will,” “expect,” “intend,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “believe,” “continue,” or other similar words. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date this report is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Neither the Partnership nor the general partners make any representations or warranties (expressed or implied) about the accuracy of any such forward-looking statements. Actual results could differ materially from any forward-looking statements contained in this Form 10-Q, and we do not intend to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise.

Any such forward-looking statements are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors and are based on a number of assumptions involving judgments with respect to, among other things, future economic, competitive, and market conditions, all of which are difficult or impossible to predict accurately. To the extent that our assumptions differ from actual results, our ability to meet such forward-looking statements, including our ability to generate positive cash flow from operations; provide distributions to limited partners; and maintain the value of our real estate properties, may be significantly hindered. Following are some of the risks and uncertainties, although not all risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ materially from those presented in certain forward-looking statements:

General economic risks

Real estate risks

Page 2

Table of Contents

Other operational risks

Page 3

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page 4

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND II-OW

BALANCE SHEETS

See accompanying notes.

Page 5

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND II-OW

STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

See accompanying notes.

Page 6

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND II-OW

STATEMENTS OF PARTNERS’ CAPITAL

FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2004

AND THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2003 (UNAUDITED)

See accompanying notes.

Page 7

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND II-OW

STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

See accompanying notes.

Page 8

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND II-OW

CONDENSED NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

MARCH 31, 2004 (UNAUDITED)

Wells Real Estate Fund II-OW (the “Partnership”) is a Georgia public limited partnership with Leo F. Wells, III and Wells Capital, Inc. (“Wells Capital”), a Georgia corporation, serving as its general partners (collectively, the “General Partners”). The Partnership was formed on October 13, 1987 for the purpose of acquiring, developing, constructing, owning, operating, improving, leasing, and managing income-producing properties for investment purposes. The Partnership has two classes of limited partnership interests, Class A and Class B Units. Limited partners may vote to, among other things, (a) amend the partnership agreement, subject to certain limitations, (b) change the business purpose or investment objectives of the Partnership, and (c) remove a general partner. A majority vote on any of the above-described matters will bind the Partnership without the concurrence of the General Partners. Each limited partnership unit generally has equal voting rights regardless of class.

On November 6, 1987, the Partnership commenced a public offering of its limited partnership units pursuant to a Registration Statement filed on Form S-11 under the Securities Act of 1933. The Partnership terminated its offering on September 7, 1988, upon receiving gross offering proceeds of $1,922,000 for 7,688 Class A and Class B limited partner units at $250 per unit from 219 limited partners.

The Partnership owns interests in all of its real estate assets through a joint venture with Fund II and Fund II-OW, which owns interests in real estate assets both directly and through joint ventures with other Wells Real Estate Funds. During the periods presented, the Partnership owned interests in the following five properties through the affiliated joint ventures listed below (the “Joint Ventures”):

Each of the aforementioned properties was acquired on an all-cash basis. The investment objectives of each of the joint venture partners listed in the above table are substantially identical to those of the Partnership. For

Page 9

Table of Contents

further information regarding the foregoing Joint Ventures and properties, refer to the report filed for the Partnership on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003.

On April 7, 2003, Fund I-II Tucker Associates sold the retail portion of Heritage Place, which comprises approximately 30% of the total premises, to an unrelated third party for a gross selling price of $3,400,000. As a result of this sale, net sales proceeds of approximately $82,000 and a gain of approximately $7,000 were allocated to the Partnership in the second quarter of 2003.

The financial statements of the Partnership have been prepared in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X, and in accordance with such rules and regulations, do not include all of the information and footnotes required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”) for complete financial statements. In the opinion of the General Partners, the statements for the unaudited interim periods presented include all adjustments that are of a normal and recurring nature and necessary to fairly present the results for such periods. Results for interim periods are not necessarily indicative of full-year results. For further information, refer to the financial statements and footnotes included in the Partnership’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003.

For the purpose of determining allocations per the partnership agreement, net income is defined generally as net income recognized by the Partnership, excluding deductions for depreciation, amortization, and cost recovery and gain on the sale of assets. Net income, as defined, of the Partnership is generally allocated each year in the same proportions that net cash from operations is distributed to the limited partners holding Class A Units and the General Partners. To the extent the Partnership’s net income in any year exceeds net cash from operations, it will be allocated 99% to the limited partners and 1% to the General Partners.

Net loss, depreciation, and amortization deductions for each fiscal year are allocated as follows: (a) 99% to the limited partners holding Class B Units and 1% to the General Partners until their capital accounts are reduced to zero; (b) then to any partner having a positive balance in his capital account in an amount not to exceed such positive balance; and (c) thereafter to the General Partners.

Gain on the sale or exchange of the Partnership’s properties will be allocated as follows: (a) first to partners having negative capital accounts, if any, until all negative capital accounts have been restored to zero; (b) then to the limited partners in proportion to and to the extent of the excess of (i) each limited partner’s adjusted capital contribution, plus a cumulative 12% per annum return on his adjusted capital contribution, less the sum of all prior distributions of cash flow from operations previously made to such limited partner, over (ii) such limited partner’s capital account balance as of the sale date, subject to the requirement to initially allocate gain on sale to limited partners holding Class B Units until they have been allocated an amount equal to the net cash available for distribution previously received by limited partners holding Class A Units on a per-unit basis; (c) then to the General Partners in proportion to and to the extent of the excess of (i) each General Partner’s adjusted capital contribution, less the sum of all prior distributions of cash flow from operations previously made to such General Partners, over (ii) such General Partner’s capital account balance as of the sale date; and (d) thereafter 85% to the limited partners and 15% to the General Partners.

Page 10

Table of Contents

Cash available for distribution, if available, is generally distributed to limited partners quarterly. In accordance with the partnership agreement, distributions are paid first to each limited partner holding Class A Units until he has received an 8% per annum return on his adjusted capital contributions, as defined. Cash available for distribution is then distributed to each limited partner holding Class B Units until he has received an 8% per annum return on his adjusted capital contributions, as defined. Excess cash available for distribution will be distributed to the General Partners until each has received 10% of total distributions to each limited partner for the year. Thereafter, cash available for distribution is distributed 90% to limited partners and 10% to the General Partners.

The Partnership does not have control over the operations of the Joint Ventures; however, it does exercise significant influence. Accordingly, the Partnership’s investment in Fund II-IIOW Associates and the Joint Ventures are recorded using the equity method of accounting, whereby original investments are recorded at cost and subsequently adjusted for contributions, distributions, and net income (loss) attributable to the Partnership. For further information, refer to the report filed for the Partnership on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003.

The following information summarizes the operations of the Fund II-IIOW Associates for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively:

The following information summarizes the operations of the Joint Ventures in which the Partnership holds interests through its ownership in Fund II-IIOW Associates for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively:

Page 11

Table of Contents

The following information summarizes the operations of the joint venture in which the Partnership holds an interest through its ownership in Fund II-III Associates for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively:

Wells Management Company, Inc. (“Wells Management”), an affiliate of the General Partners, is entitled to compensation for the management and leasing of the Partnership’s properties owned through Joint Ventures equal to (a) 3% of the gross revenues for management and 3% of the gross revenues for leasing (aggregate maximum of 6%) plus a separate fee for the one-time lease-up of newly constructed properties in an amount not to exceed the fee customarily charged in arm’s-length transactions by others rendering similar services in the same geographic area for similar properties or (b) in the case of commercial properties which are leased on a long-term net basis (ten or more years), 1% of the gross revenues except for initial leasing fees equal to 3% of the gross revenues over the first five years of the lease term. The properties in which the Partnership owns an interest incurred management and leasing fees payable to Wells Management of $56,487 and $45,390 for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

Wells Capital and its affiliates perform certain administrative services for the Partnership, such as accounting and other partnership administration, and incur the related expenses. Such expenses are allocated among the various Wells Real Estate Funds based on time spent on each fund by individual administrative personnel. In the opinion of management, this allocation is a reasonable estimation of such expenses. Fund II-IIOW Associates and the Joint Ventures have reimbursed Wells Capital $64,265 and $62,918 for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

The General Partners are also general partners of other Wells Real Estate Funds. As such, there may exist conflicts of interest where the General Partners in their capacity as general partners of other Wells Real Estate Funds may be in competition with the Partnership in connection with property acquisitions or for tenants in similar geographic markets.

Page 12

Table of Contents

On April 6, 2004, Fund II-III Associates and Fund II-III-VI-VII Associates (collectively, the “Seller”) entered into an agreement to sell the two properties listed below to an unrelated third party (the “Purchaser”) for a gross sales price of $9,500,000. This transaction is currently subject to a due diligence period expiring on May 21, 2004, during which the Purchaser has the right to terminate the agreement for any reason. Accordingly, there are no assurances that this sale will close.

On or about March 12, 2004, a putative class action complaint (the “complaint”) relating to Wells Real Estate Fund I, a public limited partnership that offered units from September 6, 1984 through September 5, 1986 (“Wells Fund I”), was filed by four individuals (the “plaintiffs”) against Leo F. Wells, III, Wells Capital, Wells Investment Securities, Inc., Wells Management, and Wells Fund I (collectively, the “Wells Defendants”) (Hendry et al. v. Leo F. Wells, III et al., Superior Court of Gwinnett County, Georgia, Civil Action No. 04-A-2791 2). The Wells Defendants received notice of the complaint on or about March 19, 2004. The plaintiffs filed the complaint purportedly on behalf of all limited partners holding B units of Wells Fund I as of January 15, 2003. The complaint alleges, among other things, that (a) during the offering period (September 6, 1984 through September 5, 1986), Mr. Wells, Wells Capital, Wells Investment Securities, Inc., and Wells Fund I negligently or fraudulently made false statements and made material omissions in connection with the initial sale of the B units to investors of Wells Fund I by making false statements and omissions in the Wells Fund I sales literature relating to the distribution of net sale proceeds to holders of B units; (b) Mr. Wells, Wells Capital and Wells Fund I negligently or fraudulently misrepresented and concealed disclosure of, among other things, alleged discrepancies between such statements and the provisions in the partnership agreement for a period of time in order to delay such investors from taking any legal, equitable or other action to protect their investments in Wells Fund I, among other reasons; and (c) Mr. Wells, Wells Capital and Wells Fund I breached their fiduciary duties to the limited partners. The plaintiffs seek, among other remedies, the following: rescission of all purported class members’ purchases of B units and an order for a full refund of all money paid for such units together with interest; judgment against the Wells Defendants, jointly and severally, in an amount to be proven at trial; punitive damages; judicial dissolution of Wells Fund I and the appointment of a receiver to wind up and terminate the partnership; and an award to plaintiffs of their attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses.

Page 13

Table of Contents

The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with the Partnership’s accompanying financial statements and notes thereto.

Management believes that the Partnership would ideally operate through the course of the following five key life cycle phases. The time spent in each phase is dependent upon various economic, industry, market, and other internal/external factors. Some overlap naturally exists in the transition from one phase to the next.

The period during which the Partnership is raising capital through the sale and issuance of limited partner units to the public

The period during which the Partnership invests the capital raised during the fund-raising phase, less upfront fees, into the acquisition of real estate assets

The period during which real estate assets are owned and operated by the Partnership during the initial lease terms of the tenants

The period during which the leases in place at the time of acquisition expire and, thus, the Partnership expends time, effort, and funds to re-lease such space to existing and/or new tenants. Following the holding phase, the Partnership continues to own and operate the real estate assets, evaluate various options for disposition, and market the real estate assets for sale.

The period during which the Partnership positions and markets its real estate investments for sale, sells its real estate investments and distributes net sales proceeds to the partner

Currently, management believes that the Partnership generally straddles the positioning-for-sale phase and the disposition and liquidation phase. Upon investing all capital proceeds and exiting the investing phase, the Partnership owned interests in six properties through interests in the Joint Ventures. As of March 31, 2004, two properties are fully leased to tenants under renewed lease terms, one property is approximately 83% leased, one property is vacant, one property was sold in 2001, and part of one property was sold in 2003, while the remainder of this property is 54% occupied as of March 31, 2004.

As the Partnership evolves through the life cycle detailed above, our most significant risks and challenges continue to evolve concurrently. During the positioning-for-sale phase, we will continue to focus on re-leasing vacant space and space that may become vacant upon the expiration of our current leases. In doing so, we seek to maximize returns to the limited partners by negotiating long-term leases at market rental rates while attempting to minimize down time, re-leasing expenditures, ongoing property level costs and portfolio costs. As we embark further into the disposition and liquidation phase, our attention will shift to locating suitable acquirers, negotiating purchase-sale contracts that will attempt to maximize the total return to the limited partners, and minimize contingencies and our post-closing involvement with the acquirer.

In 2004, net loss increased primarily due to the sale of the retail portion of Heritage Place in the second quarter of 2003 partially offset by an increase in occupancy of Boeing at the Atrium and the Holcomb Bridge Property

Page 14

Table of Contents

beginning in the second half of 2003. Cash flows remained relatively stable in the first quarter of 2004 as compared to the first quarter of 2003.

During 2004, the Partnership anticipates transitioning further into the disposition and liquidation phase. Substantially all of the Partnership’s operational revenues are generated from the operations of the properties in the Partnership’s portfolio. On a quarterly basis, we deduct the expenses related to the recurring operations of the properties and the portfolio from such revenues and assess the amount of the remaining cash flows that will be required to fund known re-leasing costs and other capital improvements. Any residual operating cash flows are considered available for distribution to the limited partners and are generally paid quarterly. As further outlined in section (c) below, we anticipate reinstating distributions to limited partners once tenants are found for the vacant Louis Rose Building and funding of related leasing costs and tenant improvements required in connection therewith.

Industry Factors

Our results continue to be impacted by a number of factors influencing the real estate industry.

General Economic and Real Estate Market Commentary

The U.S. economy appears to be recovering; however, thus far it has been a jobless recovery, and because of this, real estate office fundamentals may not improve until employment growth strengthens. The economy has shown signs of growth recently, as companies have recommenced making investments in new employees. Job growth is the most significant demand driver for office markets. The jobless recovery has resulted in a demand deficit for office space. In general, the real estate office market lags behind the overall economic recovery and, therefore, recovery is not expected until late 2004 or 2005 at the earliest, and then will vary by market.

Overall, real estate market fundamentals are weak; however, capital continues to flow into the asset class. This increased capital drives the prices of many properties upward and investor returns downward. There is a significant pricing differential in underwriting parameters between well-leased assets with credit tenants and those with either existing vacancies or substantial near-term tenant rollover. Properties with long-term leases to strong credit tenants have seen an increase in value.

The office market has significant excess space. Vacancy levels are believed to be at or near their peak. There is some encouraging news, new construction continues to taper off, coming to a complete halt in many markets.

As a result of the slowdown in new construction and the modest decline in sublease space, net absorption has turned positive, although barely, at year-end. Many industry professionals believe office market fundamentals are bottoming-out; however, a recovery cannot be expected until job growth and corresponding demand for office space increases.

Wells Real Estate Funds with Current Vacancy or Near-term Rollover Exposure

Real estate funds, such as the Partnership, that contain properties with current vacancies or near-term tenant rollover may face a challenging leasing environment. The properties within these funds will face lower rents and higher concession packages to the tenants in order to re-lease vacant space.

From a valuation standpoint, it is generally preferable to either renew an existing tenant lease or re-lease the property prior to marketing it for sale. Generally, buyers will heavily discount their offering price to compensate for the existing or pending vacancies.

Page 15

Table of Contents

Gross Revenues

The Partnership had no gross revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003.

Expenses of the Partnership

Expenses of the Partnership were $8,818 and $5,960 for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively, and comprised solely of equity in loss of Fund II-IIOW Associates, which is further described below.

Equity In Loss of Fund II-IIOW Associates

Gross Revenues of Fund II-IIOW Associates

Gross revenues of Fund II-IIOW Associates decreased in 2004, as compared to 2003, resulting primarily from the decrease in equity in income of Joint Ventures as described in the following section.

Equity in Loss of Affiliated Joint Ventures – Continuing Operations

Gross Revenues of Joint Ventures in which Fund II-IIOW Associates Holds Interests

Gross revenues of the joint ventures in which Fund II-IIOW Associates holds interests decreased in 2004, as compared to 2003, primarily due to a decrease in occupancy for the Heritage Place, partially offset by an increase in occupancy for Boeing at the Atrium and the Holcomb Bridge Property.

Expenses of Joint Ventures in which Fund II-IIOW Associates Holds Interests

The expenses of the joint ventures in which Fund II-IIOW Associates holds interests increased in 2004, as compared to 2003, primarily due to an increase in operating costs related to the increases in occupancy of Boeing at the Atrium and the Holcomb Bridge Property.

Equity In Loss of Affiliated Joint Ventures – Discontinued Operations

On April 7, 2003, the Fund I-II Tucker Associates sold the retail portion of Heritage Place, which comprises approximately 30% of the total premises. The retail portion of Heritage Place was sold for a gross sales price of $3,400,000, resulting in a gain of approximately $293,000, net of selling expenses of approximately $158,000.

Equity in income of Fund II-IIOW Associates from discontinued operations of the Joint Ventures decreased for the three months ended March 31, 2004, as compared to the same period in 2003, due to the sale of the retail portion of Heritage Place on April 7, 2003.

As a result of all of the aforementioned factors, Fund II-IIOW Associates’ equity in income of Joint Ventures decreased to $34,259 from $93,387 for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

Expenses of Fund II-IIOW Associates

Expenses of Fund II-IIOW Associates remained relatively stable at $212,586 in 2004 and $214,402 in 2003.

Net Loss of the Partnership

As a result of the aforementioned factors, the Partnership reported a net loss of $8,818 and $5,960 for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

Page 16

Table of Contents

Cash Flows From Operating Activities

Net cash flows from operating activities were $0 and $(1,166) for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. The 2004 increase from 2003 resulted primarily from the changes in the timing of paying accounts payable.

Distributions

No distributions were paid to the limited partners holding Class A Units in either the first quarter of 2004 or the first quarter of 2003. The General Partners anticipate that distributions per unit to limited partners holding Class A Units will be reinstated following the re-leasing of the Louis Rose Building and funding related leasing costs and tenant improvements required in connection therewith. In accordance with the partnership agreement, no distributions have been made to the limited partners holding Class B Units or to the General Partners.

Sales Proceeds

Rather than distributing to the limited partners, the Partnership’s share of the net proceeds generated from the sales of the Cherokee Commons property and the retail portion of the Heritage Place property are being held in reserve as the General Partners continue to evaluate the capital needs of the existing properties in which the Partnership holds an interest in consideration of the best interests of the limited partners.

Capital Resources

The Partnership is an investment vehicle formed for the purpose of acquiring, owning, and operating income-producing real properties and has invested all of its funds available for investment. Accordingly, it is unlikely that the Partnership will acquire interests in any additional properties. In the near term, the General Partners anticipate that the Partnership will utilize capital resources to fund its pro-rata portion of the costs necessary to (i) re-lease the Louis Rose Building, (ii) increase the occupancy of Heritage Place, and (iii) fund building improvements for Boeing at the Atrium.

The Partnership and its Joint Ventures have entered into agreements with Wells Capital and its affiliates, whereby the Partnership or its Joint Ventures pay certain fees or reimbursements to Wells Capital or its affiliates for property management and leasing fees, and reimbursement of operating and administrative costs. See Note 4 to the Partnership’s financial statements included in this report for a discussion of the various related-party transactions, agreements, and fees.

The real estate market has not been affected significantly by inflation in the past three years due to the relatively low inflation rate. However, there are provisions in the majority of tenant leases, which would protect the Partnership from the impact of inflation. These provisions include reimbursement billings for operating expense pass-through charges, real estate tax and insurance reimbursements on a per-square-foot basis, or in some cases, annual reimbursement of operating expenses above a certain per-square-foot allowance. There is no assurance, however, that the Partnership would be able to replace existing leases with new leases at higher base rental rates.

Page 17

Table of Contents

The Partnership’s accounting policies have been established to conform with GAAP. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to use judgment in the application of accounting policies, including making estimates and assumptions. These judgments affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the dates of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting periods. If management’s judgment or interpretation of the facts and circumstances relating to various transactions had been different, it is possible that different accounting policies would have been applied; thus resulting in a different presentation of the financial statements. Additionally, other companies may utilize different estimates that may impact comparability of the Partnership’s results of operations to those of companies in similar businesses.

Below is a discussion of the accounting policies that management considers to be critical in that they may require complex judgment in their application or require estimates about matters that are inherently uncertain.

Investment in Real Estate Assets

Management is required to make subjective assessments as to the useful lives of its depreciable assets. Management considers the period of future benefit of the asset to determine the appropriate useful lives. These assessments have a direct impact on net income. The estimated useful lives of the Joint Venture’s assets by class are as follows:

In the event that management uses inappropriate useful lives or methods for depreciation, the Partnership’s net income would be misstated.

Valuation of Real Estate Assets

Management continually monitors events and changes in circumstances that could indicate that the carrying amounts of the real estate assets in which the Partnership has an ownership interest, either directly or through investments in Joint Ventures, may not be recoverable. When indicators of potential impairment are present which indicate that the carrying amounts of real estate assets may not be recoverable, management assesses the recoverability of the real estate assets by determining whether the carrying value of the real estate assets will be recovered through the undiscounted future operating cash flows expected from the use of the asset and its eventual disposition. In the event that such expected undiscounted future cash flows do not exceed the carrying value, management adjusts the real estate assets to the fair value and recognizes an impairment loss. Management has determined that there has been no impairment in the carrying value of real estate assets held by the Partnership as of March 31, 2004.

Projections of expected future cash flows require management to estimate future market rental income amounts subsequent to the expiration of current lease agreements, property operating expenses, discount rates, the number of months it takes to re-lease the property, and the number of years the property is held for investment. The use of inappropriate assumptions in the future cash flow analysis would result in an incorrect assessment of the property’s future cash flows and fair value, and could result in the overstatement of the carrying value of real estate assets held by the Joint Ventures and net income of the Partnership.

Page 18

Table of Contents

On or about March 12, 2004, a putative class action complaint (the “complaint”) relating to Wells Real Estate Fund I, a public limited partnership that offered units from September 6, 1984 through September 5, 1986 (“Wells Fund I”), was filed by four individuals (the “plaintiffs”) against Leo F. Wells, III, Wells Capital, Wells Investment Securities, Inc., Wells Management, and Wells Fund I (collectively, the “Wells Defendants”) (Hendry et al. v. Leo F. Wells, III et al., Superior Court of Gwinnett County, Georgia, Civil Action No. 04-A-2791 2). The Wells Defendants received notice of the complaint on or about March 19, 2004. The plaintiffs filed the complaint purportedly on behalf of all limited partners holding B units of Wells Fund I as of January 15, 2003. The complaint alleges, among other things, that (a) during the offering period (September 6, 1984 through September 5, 1986), Mr. Wells, Wells Capital, Wells Investment Securities, Inc., and Wells Fund I negligently or fraudulently made false statements and made material omissions in connection with the initial sale of the B units to investors of Wells Fund I by making false statements and omissions in the Wells Fund I sales literature relating to the distribution of net sale proceeds to holders of B units; (b) Mr. Wells, Wells Capital, and Wells Fund I negligently or fraudulently misrepresented and concealed disclosure of, among other things, alleged discrepancies between such statements and the provisions in the partnership agreement for a period of time in order to delay such investors from taking any legal, equitable or other action to protect their investments in Wells Fund I, among other reasons; and (c) Mr. Wells, Wells Capital, and Wells Fund I breached their fiduciary duties to the limited partners. The plaintiffs seek, among other remedies, the following: rescission of all purported class members’ purchases of B units and an order for a full refund of all money paid for such units together with interest; judgment against the Wells Defendants, jointly and severally, in an amount to be proven at trial; punitive damages; judicial dissolution of Wells Fund I and the appointment of a receiver to wind up and terminate the partnership; and an award to plaintiffs of their attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses.

On April 6, 2004, Fund II-III Associates and Fund II-III-VI-VII Associates (collectively, the “Seller”) entered into an agreement to sell the two properties listed below to an unrelated third party (the “Purchaser”) for a gross sales price of $9,500,000. This transaction is currently subject to a due diligence period expiring on May 21, 2004, during which the Purchaser has the right to terminate the agreement for any reason. Accordingly, there are no assurances that this sale will close.

ITEM 3.    QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISKS

Since the Partnership does not borrow any money, make any foreign investments, or invest in any market risk-sensitive instruments, it is not subject to risks relating to interest rates, foreign current exchange rate fluctuations, or the other market risks contemplated by Item 305 of Regulation S-K.

Page 19

Table of Contents

ITEM 4.    CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

The Partnership carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of management of Wells Capital, the corporate general partner of the Partnership, including the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Partnership’s disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Based upon that evaluation, the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer concluded that the Partnership’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective.

There were no significant changes in the Partnership’s internal controls over financial reporting that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting.

PART II.    OTHER INFORMATION

ITEM 6.    EXHIBITS AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

Page 20

Table of Contents

EXHIBIT INDEX

TO

FIRST QUARTER FORM 10-Q

OF

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND II-OW