Back to GetFilings.com

Table of Contents

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended March 31, 2004

OR

For the transition period from                                 to                                 

Commission file number 0-23719

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND X, L.P

(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 X, L.P. (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 X, L.P.

BALANCE SHEETS

ASSETS

LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS’ CAPITAL

See accompanying notes.

Page 5

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND X, L.P.

STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

See accompanying notes.

Page 6

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND X, L.P.

STATEMENTS OF PARTNERS’ CAPITAL

FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2003

AND THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2004 (unaudited)

See accompanying notes.

Page 7

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND X, L.P.

STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

See accompanying notes.

Page 8

Table of Contents

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND X, L.P.

CONDENSED NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

MARCH 31, 2004 (unaudited)

1.    SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

(a) Organization and Business

Wells Real Estate Fund X, L.P. (the “Partnership”) is a Georgia public limited partnership with Leo F. Wells, III and Wells Partners, L.P. (“Wells Partners”), a Georgia nonpublic limited partnership, serving as the general partners (collectively, the “General Partners”). The Partnership was formed on June 20, 1996 for the purpose of acquiring, developing, owning, operating, improving, leasing, and managing income-producing commercial properties for investment purposes. Upon subscription, limited partners elect to have their units treated as Class A Units or Class B Units. Limited partners have the right to change their prior elections to have some or all of their units treated as Class A Units or Class B Units one time during each annual accounting period. 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) add or 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 has equal voting rights regardless of class.

On December 31, 1996, the Partnership commenced a public offering of up to $35,000,000 of limited partnership units pursuant to a Registration Statement filed on Form S-11 under the Securities Act of 1933. The Partnership commenced active operations on February 4, 1997 upon receiving and accepting subscriptions for 125,000 units. The offer terminated on December 30, 1997, at which time the Partnership had sold approximately 2,116,099 Class A Units and 596,792 Class B Units for total limited partner capital contributions of $27,128,912.

The Partnership owns interests in all of its real estate assets through joint ventures with other Wells Real Estate Funds. During the periods presented, the Partnership owned interests in the following seven properties through the affiliated joint ventures listed below (the “Joint Ventures”):

Page 9

Table of Contents

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 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 September 11, 2003, Fund X-XI-REIT Associates-Orange County sold the Cort Building to an unrelated third party for a gross selling price of $5,770,000. As a result of the sales, net proceeds of approximately $1,803,000 and loss of approximately $124,000 were allocated to the Partnership during the third quarter of 2003.

(b) Basis of Presentation

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.

(c) Allocations of Net Income, Net Loss, and Gain on Sale

For the purpose of determining allocations per the partnership agreement, net income is defined as net income recognized by the Partnership, excluding deductions for depreciation, amortization, and cost recovery and the 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

Page 10

Table of Contents

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 will be 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.

Gains on the sale or exchange of the Partnership’s properties will be allocated generally in the same manner that the net proceeds from such sale are distributed to partners after the following allocations are made, if applicable: (a) allocations made pursuant to the qualified income offset provisions of the partnership agreement; (b) allocations to partners having negative capital accounts until all negative capital accounts have been restored to zero; and (c) allocations to limited partners holding Class B Units in amounts equal to the deductions for depreciation and amortization previously allocated to them with respect to the specific partnership property sold, but not in excess of the amount of gain on sale recognized by the Partnership with respect to the sale of such property.

(d) Distributions of Net Cash From Operations

Cash available for distribution, if available, is generally distributed to limited partners quarterly. In accordance with the partnership agreement, distributions are paid first to limited partners holding Class A Units until they have received a 10% per annum return on their net capital contributions, as defined. Then distributions are paid to the General Partners until they have received 10% of the total amount distributed to date. Any remaining cash available for distribution is split 90% to the limited partners holding Class A Units and 10% to the General Partners. No cash distributions will be made to the limited partners holding Class B Units.

(e) Distribution of Sales Proceeds

Upon the sale of properties, the net sales proceeds will be distributed in the following order:

Page 11

Table of Contents

(a) Basis of Presentation

The Partnership owned interests in seven properties during the periods presented through its ownership in the Joint Ventures. The Partnership does not have control over the operations of these Joint Ventures; however, it does exercise significant influence. Accordingly, the Partnership’s investments in 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 regarding investments in joint ventures, see the report filed for the Partnership on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003.

(b) Summary of Operations

The following information summarizes the operations of the Joint Ventures for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively:

Page 12

Table of Contents

The following information summarizes the operations of the joint ventures in which the Partnership held an interest through its interest in Fund X-XI Associates for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively:

3.    RELATED-PARTY TRANSACTIONS

(a) Management and Leasing Fees

The Partnership entered into a property management and leasing agreement with Wells Management, Inc. (“Wells Management”), an affiliate of the General Partners. In consideration for supervising the management of properties, such properties will generally pay Wells Management management and leasing fees 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 initial 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 interests incurred management and leasing fees payable to Wells Management of $81,921 and $64,829 for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

(b) Administration Reimbursements

Wells Capital, Inc. (“Wells Capital”), the general partner of Wells Partners, one of our General Partners, and its affiliates perform certain administrative services for the Partnership, such as accounting, property management, 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. The Partnership reimbursed Wells Capital $16,597 and $16,129 for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively, for these services and expenses. In addition, the Joint Ventures reimbursed Wells Capital $49,169 and $44,744 for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively, for these services and expenses.

(c) Conflicts of Interest

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 13

Table of Contents

4.    CONTINGENCIES

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.

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

(a) Overview

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

Page 14

Table of Contents

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 sells its real estate investments and distributes net sales proceeds to the partners

Currently, management believes that the Partnership is predominantly operating in the holding phase. Upon investing all capital proceeds and exiting the investing phase, the Partnership owned interests in seven properties through interests in affiliated joint ventures. As of March 31, 2004, two properties are substantially leased to tenants in the middle of their initial lease terms; two properties are substantially leased to tenants whose leases will expire near-term in 2005; one property is fully leased to a tenant, Fairchild, whose lease will expire in November 2004; one property is fully leased to a tenant, Alstom Power, who has given notice of exercising an early termination option effective December 31, 2004; and one property has been sold. Management will continue to pursue various re-leasing strategies for the Fairchild Building and the Alstom Power-Knoxville Building during 2004.

As the Partnership evolves through the life cycle, 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. Later as we embark 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.

During 2004, the Partnership anticipates continuing to operate in the holding phase and focus resources on locating suitable replacement tenants for vacant space as necessary. Substantially all of our operating 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 using a portion of future operating cash flows to fund the costs necessary to re-lease the Fairchild Building (lease expires effective November 30, 2004) and the Alstom Power – Knoxville Building (early termination option becomes effective December 31, 2004), and to fund parking lot repairs for the 360 Interlocken Building and the Avaya Building. In addition, under the terms of the Alstom Power lease, Alstom Power has the right to request the landlord to fund tenant improvements of up to $245,000 through December 2004; Fund IX-X-XI-REIT Associates has not received a request for any such improvements to date.

Industry Factors

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

Page 15

Table of Contents

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 slow down 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.

(b) Results of Operations

Gross Revenues

Gross revenues of the Partnership remained relatively stable at $277,827 and $274,239 for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

Equity in Income of Joint Ventures

Gross Revenues of Joint Ventures

Gross revenues of Joint Ventures decreased in 2004, as compared to 2003, primarily due to the forgone cash flows from the sale of the Cort Building in the third quarter of 2003.

Expenses of Joint Ventures

Expenses of Joint Ventures also decreased in 2004, as compared to 2003, primarily due to the sale of the Cort Building in the third quarter of 2003.

As a result of all of the factors described above, equity in income of Joint Ventures remained relatively stable at $273,809 and $273,656 for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

Page 16

Table of Contents

Expenses of the Partnership

Expenses of the Partnership were relatively stable at $28,930 and $31,120 for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

Net Income of the Partnership

As a result of all of the aforementioned factors, net income of the Partnership was $248,897 and $243,119 for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

Cash Flows From Operating Activities

Net cash flows from operating activities were $(11,661) and $(18,776) for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. The decrease in cash flows used for 2004, as compared to 2003, resulted primarily from an increase in interest income on sales proceeds from the Cort Building, which was sold in the third quarter of 2003.

Cash Flows From Investing Activities

Net cash flows from investing activities were $478,980 and $388,019 for the three months ended March 31, 2004, and 2003, respectively. The 2004 increase from 2003 is largely attributable to a decrease in distributions received from joint ventures for the three months ended March 31, 2003.

Cash Flows From Financing Activities

Net cash flows from financing activities were $(430,715) and $(495,062) for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. Cash flows from financing activities is solely comprised of distributions paid to limited partners. The decline in cash flows used for 2004, as compared to 2003, is primarily attributable to the corresponding declines in operating distributions received from Fund X-XI Associates, as a result of the sale of the Cort Building in the third quarter of 2003.

Distributions

The Partnership made distributions to the limited partners holding Class A Units of $0.14 and $0.19 per unit for the quarters ended March 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. Such distributions have been made primarily from distributions received from investments in Joint Ventures. The General Partners anticipate that distributions to limited partners may decline in the near term as a result of funding the Partnership’s pro-rata portion of costs anticipated to be required in connection with (i) increasing occupancy at the 360 Interlocken Building; (ii) re-leasing the Alstom Power—Knoxville Building and the Fairchild Building; and (iii) funding parking lot repairs and improvements for the 360 Interlocken Building and the Avaya Building.

Distributions accrued for the first quarter of 2004 to the limited partners holding Class A Units were paid in May 2004. In accordance with the partnership agreement, no cash distributions were made to limited partners holding Class B Units or to the General Partners.

Capital Resources

The Partnership is an investment vehicle formed for the purpose of acquiring, owning, and operating income-producing real properties. 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 fund its pro-rata portion of

Page 17

Table of Contents

the costs necessary to: (i) increase the occupancy of the 360 Interlocken Building; (ii) re-lease the Alstom Power-Knoxville Building (early termination option becomes effective December 31, 2004) and the Fairchild Building (lease expiration becomes effective November 2004); and (iii) fund parking lot repairs and improvements for the 360 Interlocken Building and the Avaya Building. In addition, under the terms of the Alstom Power lease, Alstom Power has the right to request the landlord to fund tenant improvements of up to $245,000 through December 2004; Fund IX-X-XI-REIT Associates has not received a request for any such improvements to date.

Sales Proceeds

Rather than distributing the net proceeds from the sale of the Cort Building to the limited partners, such proceeds will be held in reserve as the Partnership continues to evaluate the capital needs of the other properties in which it holds an interest in consideration of the best interests of the limited partners. Upon completing this evaluation, the General Partners anticipate distributing the net sales proceeds not otherwise reserved to the limited partners in accordance with the terms of the partnership agreement in 2004.

(d) Related-Party Transactions

The Partnership and its joint ventures have entered into agreements with Wells Capital, the general partner of Wells Partners and its affiliates, whereby the Partnership or its joint ventures pay certain fees or reimbursements to Wells Capital or its affiliates (e.g., property management and leasing fees, administrative salary reimbursements, etc.). 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.

(e) Inflation

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.

(f) Application of Critical Accounting Policies

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.

Page 18

Table of Contents

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 Ventures’ 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.

(g) Certain Litigation Involving Our General Partners

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

Page 19

Table of Contents

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.

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.

The Partnership carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of management of Wells Capital, the corporate general partner of one of the General Partners 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 has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting.

PART II.    OTHER INFORMATION

Page 20

Table of Contents

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 21

Table of Contents

EXHIBIT INDEX

TO

FIRST QUARTER FORM 10-Q

OF

WELLS REAL ESTATE FUND X, L.P.