UNITED STATES
                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             Washington, D.C. 20549

                                   Form 10-QSB

(Mark One)
[X]   QUARTERLY REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
      ACT OF 1934

              For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2005


[ ]   TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT


             For the transition period from _________to _________

                         Commission file number 0-14099


                       CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES VI
        (Exact name of small business issuer as specified in its charter)



         California                                             94-2940204
(State or other jurisdiction of                              (I.R.S. Employer
 incorporation or organization)                             Identification No.)

                          55 Beattie Place, PO Box 1089
                        Greenville, South Carolina 29602
                    (Address of principal executive offices)

                                 (864) 239-1000
                           (Issuer's telephone number)

Check  whether the issuer (1) filed all reports  required to be filed by Section
13 or 15(d) of the  Exchange  Act during the past 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 ___

Indicate by check mark whether the  registrant is a shell company (as defined in
Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act) Yes __ No X_




<PAGE>



                         PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION


ITEM 1.     Financial Statements


                       CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES VI
                           CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
                                   (Unaudited)
                        (in thousands, except unit data)

                               September 30, 2005

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


Assets
<S>                                                                           <C>
   Cash and cash equivalents                                                  $ 11
   Receivables and deposits                                                      31
   Other assets                                                                  48
   Assets held for sale (Note A)                                              5,810
                                                                            $ 5,900
Liabilities and Partners' Deficit
Liabilities
   Accounts payable                                                          $ 111
   Other liabilities                                                             57
   Due to affiliates (Note B)                                                 1,020
   Liabilities related to assets held for sale (Note A)                       4,933

Partners' Deficit
   General partner                                               $ (2)
   Special limited partners                                        (79)
   Limited partners (181,300 units issued and
      outstanding)                                                (140)        (221)

                                                                            $ 5,900
</TABLE>


         See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements


<PAGE>






                      CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES VI
              CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS
                                   (Unaudited)
                      (in thousands, except per unit data)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                          Three Months               Nine Months
                                       Ended September 30,       Ended September 30,
                                        2005         2004         2005         2004

   Revenues:
<S>                                    <C>          <C>          <C>          <C>
      Rental income                    $ 409        $ 391        $ 1,232      $ 1,221
      Other income                         66           60           173          174
      Casualty gain (Note C)               --           12            20           21
          Total revenues                  475          463         1,425        1,416

   Expenses:
      Operating                           291          249           751          637
      General and administrative           34           39           111          139
      Depreciation                         87          113           331          347
      Interest                            114          100           327          298
      Property taxes                       32           30            96           89
          Total expenses                  558          531         1,616        1,510

   Net loss from discontinued
     operations                        $ (83)       $ (68)       $ (191)       $ (94)

   Net loss allocated to
      general partner (0.2%)            $ --         $ --         $ --         $ --

   Net loss allocated to
      limited partners (99.8%)            (83)         (68)         (191)         (94)

                                       $ (83)       $ (68)       $ (191)       $ (94)

   Net loss per limited
      partnership unit                $ (0.46)     $ (0.38)      $ (1.05)     $ (0.52)

   Distributions per limited
      partnership unit                  $ --         $ --         $ --        $ 0.57

</TABLE>

         See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements


<PAGE>




                      CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES VI
            CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' DEFICIT
                                   (Unaudited)
                        (in thousands, except unit data)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                    Limited                 Special
                                  Partnership    General    Limited   Limited
                                     Units       Partner   Partners   Partners     Total

<S>                                 <C>            <C>       <C>      <C>         <C>
Original capital contributions      181,808        $ 1       $ --     $45,452     $45,453

Partners' (deficiency) capital
   at December 31, 2004             181,300       $ (2)      $ (79)     $ 51       $ (30)

Net loss for the nine months
   ended September 30, 2005              --          --         --       (191)       (191)

Partners' deficit
   at September 30, 2005            181,300       $ (2)      $ (79)    $ (140)    $ (221)

</TABLE>

         See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements


<PAGE>



                       CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES VI
                      CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
                                   (Unaudited)
                                 (in thousands)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                 Nine Months Ended
                                                                   September 30,
                                                                   2005        2004
Cash flows from operating activities:
<S>                                                              <C>          <C>
  Net loss                                                       $ (191)      $ (94)
  Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net
   cash provided by operating activities:
   Depreciation                                                     331          347
   Amortization of loan costs                                         5            6
   Casualty gain                                                    (20)         (21)
   Change in accounts:
      Receivables and deposits                                       (5)          (1)
      Other assets                                                   (9)         (17)
      Accounts payable                                               54          (47)
      Tenant security deposit liabilities                           (17)          (1)
      Accrued property taxes                                        (30)         (35)
      Other liabilities                                             (40)          52
      Due to affiliates                                             114          (33)
         Net cash provided by operating activities                  192          156

Cash flows from investing activities:
  Property improvements and replacements                           (620)        (186)
  Insurance proceeds received                                        21           41
         Net cash used in investing activities                     (599)        (145)

Cash flows from financing activities:
  Payments on mortgage note payable                                (134)        (111)
  Advances from affiliates                                          492           --
  Distributions paid to partners                                     --         (107)
         Net cash provided by (used in) financing
             activities                                             358         (218)

Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents                           (49)        (207)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period                     60          243
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period                        $ 11        $ 36

Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
  Cash paid for interest                                         $ 281        $ 259
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash activity:
  Property improvements and replacements included in
   accounts payable                                               $ 28        $ 294
</TABLE>

Included in property  improvements  and  replacements  for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 are approximately $11,000 of improvements which were included
in accounts payable at December 31, 2004.

         See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements


<PAGE>





                       CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES VI
                   NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
                                   (Unaudited)


Note A - Basis of Presentation

The accompanying  unaudited  consolidated  financial  statements of Consolidated
Capital  Properties VI (the "Partnership" or "Registrant") have been prepared in
accordance with generally accepted  accounting  principles for interim financial
information  and  with the  instructions  to Form  10-QSB  and  Item  310(b)  of
Regulation  S-B.  Accordingly,  they do not include all of the  information  and
footnotes  required by generally  accepted  accounting  principles  for complete
financial  statements.  In the opinion of ConCap  Equities,  Inc.  ("CEI" or the
"General  Partner"),  all adjustments  (consisting of normal recurring accruals)
considered  necessary  for a fair  presentation  have been  included.  Operating
results  for the  three  and nine  months  ended  September  30,  2005,  are not
necessarily  indicative  of the results that may be expected for the fiscal year
ending  December 31, 2005. For further  information,  refer to the  consolidated
financial  statements and footnotes thereto included in the Partnership's Annual
Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended  December 31, 2004.  The General
Partner  is  an  affiliate  of  Apartment   Investment  and  Management  Company
("AIMCO"), a publicly traded real estate investment trust.

In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards ("SFAS") No. 144,
"Accounting  for  the  Impairment  or  Disposal  of  Long-Lived   Assets",   the
accompanying consolidated statements of operations for the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2005 and 2004 reflect the operations of Colony of Springdale
Apartments as loss from  discontinued  operations due to its sale on October 28,
2005 (see Note D -  Subsequent  Event).  In  accordance  with SFAS No. 144,  the
assets and  liabilities of Colony of Springdale  Apartments have been classified
as held for sale at September 30, 2005.

Note B - Related Party Transactions

The  Partnership  has no  employees  and depends on the General  Partner and its
affiliates for the management and administration of all Partnership  activities.
The Partnership  Agreement  provides for (i) certain  payments to affiliates for
services and (ii)  reimbursement of certain  expenses  incurred by affiliates on
behalf of the Partnership.

Affiliates  of the  General  Partner  receive  5% of  gross  receipts  from  the
Partnership's   property  as  compensation  for  providing  property  management
services.  The  Partnership  paid to such affiliates  approximately  $69,000 and
$68,000 for the nine months  ended  September  30, 2005 and 2004,  respectively,
which is included in operating expenses.

Affiliates of the General Partner charged the Partnership for  reimbursement  of
accountable  administrative  expenses  amounting to  approximately  $145,000 and
$103,000 for the nine months ended  September  30, 2005 and 2004,  respectively,
which is  included in general and  administrative  expenses  and assets held for
sale. The portion of these  reimbursements  included in investment  property for
the  nine  months  ended  September  30,  2005 and  2004  are  fees  related  to
construction management services provided by an affiliate of the General Partner
of approximately $67,000 and $7,000,  respectively.  The construction management
service fees are calculated based on a percentage of additions to the investment
property.  Approximately  $135,000 of the  accountable  administrative  expenses
remained  unpaid as of September 30, 2005 and are included in due to affiliates.
These expenses were paid subsequent to September 30, 2005.

The Partnership Agreement also provides for a special management fee equal to 9%
of the total  distributions  made from operations to the Limited  Partners to be
paid  to  the  General  Partner  for  executive  and  administrative  management
services. The General Partner earned approximately $9,000 during the nine months
ended  September  30,  2004  which is  included  in general  and  administrative
expenses. No such fee was earned for the nine months ended September 30, 2005 as
there were no operating distributions.

During the nine months ended  September 30, 2005, the General  Partner  advanced
the Partnership  approximately $492,000.  Interest was charged at the prime rate
plus 2% (8.75% at September 30, 2005) and amounted to approximately  $37,000 for
the nine months ended  September 30, 2005. At September 30, 2005,  the amount of
outstanding  loans  and  accrued  interest  was  approximately  $885,000  and is
included in due to affiliates.  These loans were repaid  subsequent to September
30, 2005 out of  proceeds  from the sale of Colony of  Springdale  (see Note D -
Subsequent  Event).  There were no loans from the General  Partner or associated
interest expense during the nine months ended September 30, 2004.

The  Partnership  insures its  property up to certain  limits  through  coverage
provided by AIMCO which is  generally  self-insured  for a portion of losses and
liabilities  related  to  workers  compensation,   property  casualty,   general
liability and vehicle liability.  The Partnership insures its property above the
AIMCO  limits  through  insurance  policies  obtained  by  AIMCO  from  insurers
unaffiliated  with the General  Partner.  During the nine months ended September
30,  2005 and 2004,  the  Partnership  was  charged by AIMCO and its  affiliates
approximately   $24,000  for  both  periods  for  insurance  coverage  and  fees
associated with policy claims administration.

Note C - Casualty Events

In January 2004 a pipe bomb explosion  occurred at the property which damaged 16
electrical  meters and exterior  siding.  No  apartment  units were  damaged.  A
casualty  gain of  approximately  $9,000 was  recognized  during the nine months
ended  September  30,  2004  due to the  receipt  of  approximately  $16,000  in
insurance  proceeds,  net  of  the  write  off  of  undepreciated  property  and
improvements of approximately $7,000.

In April 2004 there was a fire at the property that damaged two apartment units.
A casualty gain of approximately  $12,000 was recognized  during the nine months
ended  September  30,  2004  due to the  receipt  of  approximately  $25,000  in
insurance  proceeds,  net  of  the  write  off  of  undepreciated  property  and
improvements of  approximately  $13,000.  During the nine months ended September
30,  2005,  there  was an  additional  casualty  gain of  approximately  $20,000
recorded  at the  property.  This  gain was the  result  of the  receipt  of the
remaining  insurance  proceeds of approximately  $21,000,  less the write off of
additional undepreciated property and improvements of approximately $1,000.

Note D - Subsequent Event

On October 28, 2005, the  Registrant  sold its  investment  property,  Colony of
Springdale Apartments, a 261-unit apartment complex located in Springdale,  Ohio
to an unrelated third party for a gross sales price of $10,400,000.  The sale of
the property resulted in a gain on the sale during the fourth quarter of 2005 of
approximately $4,215,000. In addition, a loss on early extinguishment of debt of
approximately  $1,248,000 was recorded due to the write off of unamortized  loan
costs and prepayment penalties.  In accordance with SFAS No. 144, the assets and
liabilities of Colony of Springdale  Apartments have been classified as held for
sale at  September  30,  2005 and its  operations  have been  shown as loss from
discontinued  operations for the three and nine months ended  September 30, 2005
and 2004.

Because  Colony  of  Springdale  Apartments  was the only  property  held by the
Partnership,  the General  Partner is considering  liquidating  the  Partnership
pending the resolution of the items discussed in "Note E - Contingencies."

Note E - Contingencies

In March 1998, several putative unit holders of limited partnership units of the
Partnership  commenced an action  entitled  Rosalie  Nuanes,  et al. v. Insignia
Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the
State of  California  for the  County  of San  Mateo.  The  plaintiffs  named as
defendants,  among others,  the Partnership,  its General Partner and several of
their affiliated  partnerships and corporate  entities.  The action purported to
assert  claims on behalf of a class of  limited  partners  and  derivatively  on
behalf of a number of limited partnerships  (including the Partnership) that are
named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other things, the acquisition of
interests in certain General Partner entities by Insignia  Financial Group, Inc.
("Insignia") and entities that were, at one time,  affiliates of Insignia;  past
tender offers by the Insignia  affiliates to acquire limited  partnership units;
management of the  partnerships  by the Insignia  affiliates;  and the series of
transactions  which  closed on October 1, 1998 and  February  26,  1999  whereby
Insignia and Insignia  Properties Trust,  respectively,  were merged into AIMCO.
The plaintiffs sought monetary damages and equitable relief,  including judicial
dissolution of the Partnership. In addition, during the third quarter of 2001, a
complaint captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group (the "Heller action") was
filed against the same  defendants  that are named in the Nuanes  action.  On or
about August 6, 2001,  plaintiffs  filed a first amended  complaint.  The Heller
action was brought as a purported  derivative  action,  and asserted claims for,
among other things,  breach of fiduciary duty, unfair  competition,  conversion,
unjust  enrichment,  and judicial  dissolution.  On January 28, 2002,  the trial
court granted  defendants  motion to strike the  complaint.  Plaintiffs  took an
appeal from this order.

On January 8, 2003,  the parties filed a  Stipulation  of Settlement in proposed
settlement of the Nuanes  action and the Heller  action.  On June 13, 2003,  the
court granted final approval of the settlement and entered  judgment in both the
Nuanes and Heller actions. On August 12, 2003, an objector ("Objector") filed an
appeal (the "Appeal")  seeking to vacate and/or reverse the order  approving the
settlement and entering judgment  thereto.  On May 4, 2004, the Objector filed a
second appeal  challenging  the court's use of a referee and its order requiring
Objector to pay those fees.

On March 21, 2005, the Court of Appeals issued opinions in both pending appeals.
With regard to the settlement and judgment entered thereto, the Court of Appeals
vacated  the trial  court's  order and  remanded  to the trial court for further
findings  on the basis that the "state of the record is  insufficient  to permit
meaningful  appellate  review".  With regard to the second appeal,  the Court of
Appeals  reversed the order requiring the Objector to pay referee fees. On April
26, 2005,  the Court of Appeals  lifted the stay of a pending  appeal related to
the Heller action and the trial court's order striking the  complaint.  On April
28, 2005, the Objector  filed a Petition for Review with the California  Supreme
Court in connection with the opinion vacating the order approving settlement and
remanding for further findings.  On June 10, 2005, the California  Supreme Court
denied  Objector's  Petition for Review and the Court of Appeals sent the matter
back to the trial court on June 21,  2005.  The parties  intend to ask the trial
court to make further findings in connection with settlement consistent with the
Court of Appeal's  remand order.  With respect to the related Heller appeal,  on
July 28, 2005,  the Court of Appeals  reversed the trial court's order  striking
the first amended complaint.

On August 18, 2005,  Objector and his counsel filed a motion to  disqualify  the
trial court based on a peremptory challenge and filed a motion to disqualify for
cause on October 17, 2005. On or about October 13, 2005 Objector  filed a motion
to  intervene  and on or about  October  19,  2005  filed  both a motion to take
discovery  relating to the adequacy of plaintiffs as derivative  representatives
and a motion to dissolve the anti-suit injunction in connection with settlement.
On October 27, 2005, the Court denied Objector's peremptory challenge and struck
Objector's motion to disqualify for cause. No hearing has been set on Objector's
remaining motions. On November 3, 2005, Objector and his counsel filed a writ of
mandate to the Court of Appeals challenging the court's October 27, 2005 order.

The  General  Partner  does not  anticipate  that any costs to the  Partnership,
whether legal or settlement costs,  associated with these cases will be material
to the Partnership's overall operations.

AIMCO Properties L.P. and NHP Management Company, both affiliates of the General
Partner,  are defendants in a lawsuit alleging that they willfully  violated the
Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") by failing to pay maintenance workers overtime
for all hours worked in excess of forty per week.  The  complaint,  filed in the
United States  District Court for the District of Columbia,  attempts to bring a
collective  action  under  the FLSA and seeks to  certify  state  subclasses  in
California, Maryland, and the District of Columbia. Specifically, the plaintiffs
contend  that  AIMCO  Properties  L.P.  and NHP  Management  Company  failed  to
compensate maintenance workers for time that they were required to be "on-call".
Additionally,  the complaint  alleges AIMCO  Properties  L.P. and NHP Management
Company failed to comply with the FLSA in compensating  maintenance  workers for
time  that they  worked in excess of 40 hours in a week.  In June 2005 the Court
conditionally  certified the collective  action on both the on-call and overtime
issues,  which allows the plaintiffs to provide notice of the collective  action
to all non-exempt  maintenance  workers from August 7, 2000 through the present.
Those  employees will have the  opportunity to opt-in to the collective  action,
and AIMCO Properties,  L.P. and NHP Management Company will have the opportunity
to move to decertify the collective action. Because the court denied plaintiffs'
motion to certify state subclasses,  on September 26, 2005, the plaintiffs filed
a class action with the same  allegations  in the Superior  Court of  California
(Contra  Costa  County).  Although the outcome of any  litigation  is uncertain,
AIMCO  Properties,  L.P. does not believe that the ultimate  outcome will have a
material  adverse effect on its consolidated  financial  condition or results of
operations.  Similarly,  the General  Partner does not believe that the ultimate
outcome will have a material  adverse effect on the  Partnership's  consolidated
financial condition or results of operations.

The  Partnership  is unaware  of any other  pending  or  outstanding  litigation
matters involving it or its investment property that are not of a routine nature
arising in the ordinary course of business.

Environmental

Various  Federal,  state and local laws subject  property owners or operators to
liability for management,  and the costs of removal or  remediation,  of certain
hazardous  substances  present on a property.  Such laws often impose  liability
without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for,
the release or presence of the  hazardous  substances.  The  presence of, or the
failure to manage or remedy properly,  hazardous substances may adversely affect
occupancy at affected  apartment  communities and the ability to sell or finance
affected properties.  In addition to the costs associated with investigation and
remediation  actions  brought by government  agencies,  and  potential  fines or
penalties  imposed by such  agencies in  connection  therewith,  the presence of
hazardous  substances on a property could result in claims by private plaintiffs
for personal injury, disease, disability or other infirmities. Various laws also
impose  liability for the cost of removal,  remediation or disposal of hazardous
substances  through a  licensed  disposal  or  treatment  facility.  Anyone  who
arranges for the disposal or treatment of hazardous  substances  is  potentially
liable  under such laws.  These laws often impose  liability  whether or not the
person arranging for the disposal ever owned or operated the disposal  facility.
In connection with the ownership,  operation and management of its property, the
Partnership could  potentially be liable for environmental  liabilities or costs
associated with its property.

Mold

The Partnership is aware of lawsuits  against owners and managers of multifamily
properties asserting claims of personal injury and property damage caused by the
presence of mold, some of which have resulted in substantial  monetary judgments
or settlements. The Partnership has only limited insurance coverage for property
damage loss claims  arising from the  presence of mold and for  personal  injury
claims  related  to  mold  exposure.  Affiliates  of the  General  Partner  have
implemented a national  policy and  procedures to prevent or eliminate mold from
its  properties  and the  General  Partner  believes  that these  measures  will
minimize the effects that mold could have on residents. To date, the Partnership
has not incurred any material  costs or  liabilities  relating to claims of mold
exposure  or to  abate  mold  conditions.  Because  the  law  regarding  mold is
unsettled and subject to change the General  Partner can make no assurance  that
liabilities  resulting  from the presence of or exposure to mold will not have a
material adverse effect on the Partnership's consolidated financial condition or
results of operations.

SEC Investigation

The  Central  Regional  Office of the  United  States  Securities  and  Exchange
Commission (the "SEC")  continues its formal  investigation  relating to certain
matters.  Although  the staff of the SEC is not limited in the areas that it may
investigate,  AIMCO believes the areas of  investigation  have included  AIMCO's
miscalculated   monthly  net  rental  income  figures  in  third  quarter  2003,
forecasted  guidance,  accounts  payable,  rent  concessions,   vendor  rebates,
capitalization  of payroll and certain other costs, tax credit  transactions and
tender offers for limited  partnership  interests.  AIMCO is cooperating  fully.
AIMCO is not able to predict when the investigation will be resolved. AIMCO does
not believe that the ultimate outcome will have a material adverse effect on its
consolidated  financial  condition  or results  of  operations.  Similarly,  the
General Partner does not believe that the ultimate  outcome will have a material
adverse effect on the Partnership's  consolidated financial condition or results
of operations.



<PAGE>



ITEM 2.     Management's Discussion and Analysis or Plan of Operation

The matters discussed in this report contain certain forward-looking statements,
including, without limitation, statements regarding future financial performance
and the effect of government  regulations.  Actual results may differ materially
from those described in the forward-looking statements and will be affected by a
variety of risks and factors including,  without limitation:  national and local
economic  conditions;  the terms of  governmental  regulations  that  affect the
Registrant and interpretations of those regulations; the competitive environment
in which the Registrant operates;  financing risks, including the risk that cash
flows from operations may be insufficient to meet required payments of principal
and interest;  real estate risks, including variations of real estate values and
the general  economic  climate in local markets and  competition  for tenants in
such markets;  litigation,  including  costs  associated  with  prosecuting  and
defending   claims  and  any  adverse   outcomes  and   possible   environmental
liabilities.   Readers  should  carefully  review  the  Registrant's   financial
statements and the notes thereto,  as well as the risk factors  described in the
documents  the  Registrant  files  from  time to time  with the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission.

The Partnership's  investment property consists of one apartment complex, Colony
of Springdale Apartments,  located in Springdale,  Ohio, which was held for sale
at September  30, 2005.  The average  occupancy for the nine month periods ended
September  30, 2005 and 2004,  was 89% and 90%,  respectively.  The property was
sold to a third party on October 28, 2005.

The Partnership's  financial results depended upon a number of factors including
the ability to attract and maintain tenants at the investment property, interest
rates on mortgage  loans,  costs  incurred to operate the  investment  property,
general  economic  conditions  and weather.  The General  Partner  monitored the
rental market  environment of its investment  property to assess the feasibility
of increasing rents,  maintaining or increasing  occupancy levels and protecting
the Partnership  from increases in expenses.  The General  Partner  attempted to
protect  the  Partnership  from the  burden of  inflation-related  increases  in
expenses by increasing  rents and  maintaining a high overall  occupancy  level.
However,  the General  Partner may have used rental  concessions and rental rate
reductions to offset softening market  conditions.  Further, a number of factors
that are  outside  the  control of the  Partnership  such as the local  economic
climate  and  weather  can  adversely  or  positively  affect the  Partnership's
financial results.

Results of Operations

The Partnership's  net loss from discontinued  operations for the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2005 was approximately  $83,000 and $191,000 compared
to a net loss of approximately $68,000 and $94,000 for the corresponding periods
in 2004. The increase in net loss for the three and nine months ended  September
30, 2005 was primarily due to an increase in total expenses  partially offset by
a slight increase in total revenues.

In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards ("SFAS") No. 144,
"Accounting  for  the  Impairment  or  Disposal  of  Long-Lived   Assets",   the
accompanying consolidated statements of operations for the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2005 and 2004 reflect the operations of Colony of Springdale
Apartments as loss from  discontinued  operations due to its sale on October 28,
2005. In accordance  with SFAS No. 144, the assets and  liabilities of Colony of
Springdale  Apartments  have been  classified  as held for sale at September 30,
2005.

On October 28, 2005, the  Registrant  sold its  investment  property,  Colony of
Springdale Apartments, a 261-unit apartment complex located in Springdale,  Ohio
to an unrelated third party for a gross sales price of $10,400,000.  The sale of
the property resulted in a gain on the sale during the fourth quarter of 2005 of
approximately $4,215,000. In addition, a loss on early extinguishment of debt of
approximately  $1,248,000 was recorded due to the write off of unamortized  loan
costs and prepayment penalties.  In accordance with SFAS No. 144, the assets and
liabilities of Colony of Springdale  Apartments have been classified as held for
sale at  September  30,  2005 and its  operations  have been  shown as loss from
discontinued  operations for the three and nine months ended  September 30, 2005
and 2004.

Because  Colony  of  Springdale  Apartments  was the only  property  held by the
Partnership,  the General  Partner is considering  liquidating  the  Partnership
pending the resolution of the items discussed in "Note E - Contingencies."

Total expenses  increased for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2005
due to increases  in  operating  and  interest  expenses  partially  offset by a
decrease in general and  administrative  and  depreciation  expenses.  Operating
expenses  increased  primarily due to increases in property,  administrative and
maintenance  expenses.  The increase in property expenses for the three and nine
months  ended  September  30, 2005 is primarily  due to  increased  salaries and
related  benefits  at the  Partnership's  property.  The  increase  in  property
expenses for the nine months ended  September  30, 2005 is also due to increased
utility expenses at the Partnership's  property.  The increase in administrative
expenses is due to an  increase  in phone  sales.  The  increase in  maintenance
expenses  is  primarily  due  to  an  increase  in  contract   services  at  the
Partnership's  property.  The decrease in  depreciation  expense is due to fixed
assets  being held for sale at  September  30, 2005 (as  discussed  above).  The
increase in interest expense is primarily due to increases in interest  incurred
on advances from affiliates. There were no advances during the nine months ended
September 30, 2004.

General  and  administrative  expenses  decreased  for the three and nine months
ended  September 30, 2005 due to a decrease in the cost of services  included in
the  management  reimbursements  to the  General  Partner as  allowed  under the
Partnership  Agreement  partially offset by an increase in costs associated with
the annual audit required by the Partnership Agreement.  The decrease in general
and administrative expenses for the nine months ended September 30, 2005 is also
due to a decrease in the special  management  fees earned by the General Partner
for executive and administration  management services. The fee is equal to 9% of
the total  distributions  made from operations to the Limited Partners and there
were no operating distributions during the nine months ended September 30, 2004.
Also included in general and  administrative  expenses are costs associated with
the quarterly and annual communications with investors and regulatory agencies.

The increase in total revenues for the three and nine months ended September 30,
2005 is  primarily  due to an increase in rental  income.  The increase in total
revenues  for the  three  months  ended  September  30,  2005 is also  due to an
increase in other  income  partially  offset by a decrease in casualty  gain (as
discussed  below).  The  increase in rental  income for the three  months  ended
September 30, 2005 is primarily due to an increase in occupancy. The increase in
rental  income for the nine months ended  September 30, 2005 is primarily due to
an increase in average rental rates. The increase in rental income for the three
and nine months ended  September  30, 2005 is also due to a decrease in bad debt
expense at the property.  Other income  increased  during the three months ended
September 30, 2005  primarily due to an increase in lease  cancellation  fees at
the property.

In January 2004 a pipe bomb explosion  occurred at the property which damaged 16
electrical  meters and exterior  siding.  No  apartment  units were  damaged.  A
casualty  gain of  approximately  $9,000 was  recognized  during the nine months
ended  September  30,  2004  due to the  receipt  of  approximately  $16,000  in
insurance  proceeds,  net  of  the  write  off  of  undepreciated  property  and
improvements of approximately $7,000.

In April 2004 there was a fire at the property that damaged two apartment units.
A casualty gain of approximately  $12,000 was recognized  during the nine months
ended  September  30,  2004  due to the  receipt  of  approximately  $25,000  in
insurance  proceeds,  net  of  the  write  off  of  undepreciated  property  and
improvements of  approximately  $13,000.  During the nine months ended September
30,  2005,  there  was an  additional  casualty  gain of  approximately  $20,000
recorded  at the  property.  This  gain was the  result  of the  receipt  of the
remaining  insurance  proceeds of approximately  $21,000,  less the write off of
additional undepreciated property and improvements of approximately $1,000.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

At  September  30,  2005,  the  Partnership  had cash and  cash  equivalents  of
approximately  $11,000 compared to approximately  $36,000 at September 30, 2004.
Cash and cash equivalents  decreased by approximately $49,000 since December 31,
2004  due to  approximately  $599,000  of  cash  used in  investing  activities,
partially  offset by  approximately  $358,000 and  $192,000 of cash  provided by
financing  and  operating  activities,  respectively.  Cash  used  in  investing
activities consisted of property improvements and replacements  partially offset
by insurance proceeds received.  Cash provided by financing activities consisted
of advances from affiliates  partially offset by principal  payments made on the
mortgage  encumbering the Partnership's  property.  The Partnership  invests its
working capital reserves in interest bearing accounts.

During the nine months ended  September  30,  2005,  the  Partnership  completed
approximately   $637,000  of  capital   improvements  at  Colony  of  Springdale
Apartments,  consisting  primarily of vinyl siding, floor covering and appliance
replacements,  balcony replacements,  structural improvements, roof replacements
and air conditioning  unit  replacements.  These  improvements  were funded from
operating  cash flow,  insurance  proceeds and  advances  from  affiliates.  The
Partnership sold Colony of Springdale Apartments on October 28, 2005.

The Partnership's assets are thought to be sufficient for any near term needs of
the  Partnership.   The  mortgage  indebtedness  encumbering  the  Partnership's
property of approximately  $4,739,000 matured in November 2019 at which time the
mortgage was scheduled to be fully amortized.  This property was sold to a third
party on October 28, 2005.

The Partnership  distributed the following  amounts during the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 and 2004 (in thousands, except per unit data):
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                  Nine Months        Per          Nine Months          Per
                     Ended         Limited           Ended           Limited
                 September 30,   Partnership     September 30,     Partnership
                      2005          Unit              2004             Unit
<S>                  <C>           <C>               <C>              <C>
   Operations        $  --         $  --             $ 107            $ 0.57
</TABLE>

Because  Colony  of  Springdale  Apartments  was the only  property  held by the
Partnership,  the General  Partner is considering  liquidating  the  Partnership
pending the resolution of the items discussed in "Note E - Contingencies."

The  Partnership  is currently  reviewing  what portion of the sale  proceeds of
Colony of Springdale Apartments will be distributed to the partners.

Other

In addition to its indirect  ownership of the general  partner  interests in the
Partnership,  AIMCO and its affiliates owned 102,000 limited  partnership  units
(the "Units") in the Partnership representing 56.26% of the outstanding Units at
September  30,  2005. A number of these Units were  acquired  pursuant to tender
offers made by AIMCO or its affiliates.  Pursuant to the Partnership  Agreement,
unitholders  holding a majority  of the Units are  entitled  to take action with
respect to a variety of matters that include,  but are not limited to, voting on
certain amendments to the Partnership Agreement and voting to remove the General
Partner.  As a result of its ownership of 56.26% of the outstanding Units, AIMCO
and its  affiliates  are in a position  to control  all  voting  decisions  with
respect to the  Partnership.  Although the General Partner owes fiduciary duties
to the  limited  partners of the  Partnership,  the  General  Partner  also owes
fiduciary duties to AIMCO as its sole  stockholder.  As a result,  the duties of
the General  Partner,  as general  partner,  to the  Partnership and its limited
partners may come into conflict with the duties of the General  Partner to AIMCO
as its sole stockholder.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

The consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting
principles   generally  accepted  in  the  United  States,   which  require  the
Partnership to make estimates and assumptions.  The Partnership believes that of
its significant  accounting policies,  the following may involve a higher degree
of judgment and complexity.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

The  investment  property is recorded at cost,  less  accumulated  depreciation,
unless  considered  impaired.  If  events  or  circumstances  indicate  that the
carrying  amount of a  property  was  impaired,  the  Partnership  would make an
assessment of its  recoverability  by estimating  the  undiscounted  future cash
flows,  excluding  interest  charges,  of the property.  If the carrying  amount
exceeded the aggregate  future cash flows,  the  Partnership  would recognize an
impairment loss to the extent the carrying amount exceeded the fair value of the
property.

Revenue Recognition

The Partnership generally leased apartment units for twelve-month terms or less.
The Partnership offered rental concessions during particularly slow months or in
response to heavy  competition from other similar  complexes in the area. Rental
income  attributable  to leases,  net of any  concessions,  was  recognized on a
straight-line  basis over the term of the lease.  The Partnership  evaluated all
accounts  receivable  from  residents and  established  an allowance,  after the
application of security deposits,  for accounts greater than 30 days past due on
current tenants and all receivables due from former tenants.

ITEM 3.     Controls and Procedures

(a) Disclosure Controls and Procedures.  The Partnership's management,  with the
participation of the principal executive officer and principal financial officer
of the Managing  General  Partner,  who are the equivalent of the  Partnership's
principal executive officer and principal financial officer,  respectively,  has
evaluated  the  effectiveness  of  the  Partnership's  disclosure  controls  and
procedures (as such term is defined in Rules  13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)  under the
Securities  Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act")) as of the end
of the period covered by this report.  Based on such  evaluation,  the principal
executive  officer  and  principal  financial  officer of the  Managing  General
Partner, who are the equivalent of the Partnership's principal executive officer
and principal  financial officer,  respectively,  have concluded that, as of the
end of such period,  the  Partnership's  disclosure  controls and procedures are
effective.

(b) Internal Control Over Financial  Reporting.  There have not been any changes
in the Partnership's  internal control over financial reporting (as such term is
defined in Rules  13a-15(f)  and  15d-15(f)  under the Exchange  Act) during the
fiscal quarter to which this report relates that have  materially  affected,  or
are reasonably likely to materially affect,  the Partnership's  internal control
over financial reporting.


<PAGE>




                           PART II - OTHER INFORMATION


ITEM 1.     LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

In March 1998, several putative unit holders of limited partnership units of the
Partnership  commenced an action  entitled  Rosalie  Nuanes,  et al. v. Insignia
Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the
State of  California  for the  County  of San  Mateo.  The  plaintiffs  named as
defendants,  among others,  the Partnership,  its General Partner and several of
their affiliated  partnerships and corporate  entities.  The action purported to
assert  claims on behalf of a class of  limited  partners  and  derivatively  on
behalf of a number of limited partnerships  (including the Partnership) that are
named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other things, the acquisition of
interests in certain General Partner entities by Insignia  Financial Group, Inc.
("Insignia") and entities that were, at one time,  affiliates of Insignia;  past
tender offers by the Insignia  affiliates to acquire limited  partnership units;
management of the  partnerships  by the Insignia  affiliates;  and the series of
transactions  which  closed on October 1, 1998 and  February  26,  1999  whereby
Insignia and Insignia  Properties Trust,  respectively,  were merged into AIMCO.
The plaintiffs sought monetary damages and equitable relief,  including judicial
dissolution of the Partnership. In addition, during the third quarter of 2001, a
complaint captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group (the "Heller action") was
filed against the same  defendants  that are named in the Nuanes  action.  On or
about August 6, 2001,  plaintiffs  filed a first amended  complaint.  The Heller
action was brought as a purported  derivative  action,  and asserted claims for,
among other things,  breach of fiduciary duty, unfair  competition,  conversion,
unjust  enrichment,  and judicial  dissolution.  On January 28, 2002,  the trial
court granted  defendants  motion to strike the  complaint.  Plaintiffs  took an
appeal from this order.

On January 8, 2003,  the parties filed a  Stipulation  of Settlement in proposed
settlement of the Nuanes  action and the Heller  action.  On June 13, 2003,  the
court granted final approval of the settlement and entered  judgment in both the
Nuanes and Heller actions. On August 12, 2003, an objector ("Objector") filed an
appeal (the "Appeal")  seeking to vacate and/or reverse the order  approving the
settlement and entering judgment  thereto.  On May 4, 2004, the Objector filed a
second appeal  challenging  the court's use of a referee and its order requiring
Objector to pay those fees.

On March 21, 2005, the Court of Appeals issued opinions in both pending appeals.
With regard to the settlement and judgment entered thereto, the Court of Appeals
vacated  the trial  court's  order and  remanded  to the trial court for further
findings  on the basis that the "state of the record is  insufficient  to permit
meaningful  appellate  review".  With regard to the second appeal,  the Court of
Appeals  reversed the order requiring the Objector to pay referee fees. On April
26, 2005,  the Court of Appeals  lifted the stay of a pending  appeal related to
the Heller action and the trial court's order striking the  complaint.  On April
28, 2005, the Objector  filed a Petition for Review with the California  Supreme
Court in connection with the opinion vacating the order approving settlement and
remanding for further findings.  On June 10, 2005, the California  Supreme Court
denied  Objector's  Petition for Review and the Court of Appeals sent the matter
back to the trial court on June 21,  2005.  The parties  intend to ask the trial
court to make further findings in connection with settlement consistent with the
Court of Appeal's  remand order.  With respect to the related Heller appeal,  on
July 28, 2005,  the Court of Appeals  reversed the trial court's order  striking
the first amended complaint.

On August 18, 2005,  Objector and his counsel filed a motion to  disqualify  the
trial court based on a peremptory challenge and filed a motion to disqualify for
cause on October 17, 2005. On or about October 13, 2005 Objector  filed a motion
to  intervene  and on or about  October  19,  2005  filed  both a motion to take
discovery  relating to the adequacy of plaintiffs as derivative  representatives
and a motion to dissolve the anti-suit injunction in connection with settlement.
On October 27, 2005, the Court denied Objector's peremptory challenge and struck
Objector's motion to disqualify for cause. No hearing has been set on Objector's
remaining motions. On November 3, 2005, Objector and his counsel filed a writ of
mandate to the Court of Appeals challenging the court's October 27, 2005 order.

The  General  Partner  does not  anticipate  that any costs to the  Partnership,
whether legal or settlement costs,  associated with these cases will be material
to the Partnership's overall operations.

AIMCO Properties L.P. and NHP Management Company, both affiliates of the General
Partner,  are defendants in a lawsuit alleging that they willfully  violated the
Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") by failing to pay maintenance workers overtime
for all hours worked in excess of forty per week.  The  complaint,  filed in the
United States  District Court for the District of Columbia,  attempts to bring a
collective  action  under  the FLSA and seeks to  certify  state  subclasses  in
California, Maryland, and the District of Columbia. Specifically, the plaintiffs
contend  that  AIMCO  Properties  L.P.  and NHP  Management  Company  failed  to
compensate maintenance workers for time that they were required to be "on-call".
Additionally,  the complaint  alleges AIMCO  Properties  L.P. and NHP Management
Company failed to comply with the FLSA in compensating  maintenance  workers for
time  that they  worked in excess of 40 hours in a week.  In June 2005 the Court
conditionally  certified the collective  action on both the on-call and overtime
issues,  which allows the plaintiffs to provide notice of the collective  action
to all non-exempt  maintenance  workers from August 7, 2000 through the present.
Those  employees will have the  opportunity to opt-in to the collective  action,
and AIMCO Properties,  L.P. and NHP Management Company will have the opportunity
to move to decertify the collective action. Because the court denied plaintiffs'
motion to certify state subclasses,  on September 26, 2005, the plaintiffs filed
a class action with the same  allegations  in the Superior  Court of  California
(Contra  Costa  County).  Although the outcome of any  litigation  is uncertain,
AIMCO  Properties,  L.P. does not believe that the ultimate  outcome will have a
material  adverse effect on its consolidated  financial  condition or results of
operations.  Similarly,  the General  Partner does not believe that the ultimate
outcome will have a material  adverse effect on the  Partnership's  consolidated
financial condition or results of operations.

ITEM 5.     OTHER INFORMATION

            None.

ITEM 6.     EXHIBITS

            See Exhibit Index Attached.



<PAGE>



                                   SIGNATURES



In accordance with the  requirements of the Exchange Act, the Registrant  caused
this  report to be  signed on its  behalf  by the  undersigned,  thereunto  duly
authorized.



                                    CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES VI


                                    By:   CONCAP EQUITIES, INC.
                                          General Partner

                                    By:   /s/Martha L. Long
                                          Martha L. Long
                                          Senior Vice President

                                    By:   /s/Stephen B. Waters
                                          Stephen B. Waters
                                          Vice President

                                    Date: November 14, 2005


<PAGE>


                       CONSOLIDATED CAPITAL PROPERTIES VI
                                  EXHIBIT INDEX


Exhibit Number    Description of Exhibit

3.1               Certificate   of  Limited   Partnership,   incorporated   by
                  reference to the Registration  Statement of Registrant filed
                  October 22, 1984, as amended to date.

3.2               Agreement of Limited Partnership,  incorporated by reference
                  to the  Registration  Statement of Registrant  filed October
                  22, 1984, as amended to date.

10.22             Multi-family  note between  Colony of  Springdale  Associates,
                  Ltd. and GMAC Commercial  Mortgage  Corporation  dated October
                  25, 1999.  (Incorporated  by reference to the Annual Report on
                  Form 10-K dated December 31, 1999.)

10.23             Purchase  and  Sale  Contract  between  Colony  of  Springdale
                  Associates,   Ltd.,  a  Texas  limited  partnership,  and  CNC
                  Investments,  Ltd., LLP, a Texas limited liability partnership
                  dated August 19, 2005.*  (Incorporated by reference to Current
                  Form 8-K dated October 28, 2005 and filed November 3, 2005).

10.24             Amendment  of Purchase  and Sale  Contract  between  Colony of
                  Springdale  Associates Ltd., a Texas limited partnership,  and
                  CNC  Investments,   Ltd.,  LLP,  a  Texas  limited   liability
                  partnership   dated  September  12,  2005.   (Incorporated  by
                  reference to Current Form 8-K dated October 28, 2005 and filed
                  November 3, 2005).

10.25             Assignment and Assumption  Agreement  between CNC Investments,
                  Ltd., LLP, a Texas limited  liability  partnership and Mayuri,
                  LLC, a Delaware  limited  liability  company  dated October 7,
                  2005.  (Incorporated  by  reference  to Current Form 8-K dated
                  October 28, 2005 and filed November 3, 2005).

10.26             Second  Amendment of Purchase and Sale Contract between Colony
                  of Springdale  Associates  Ltd., a Texas limited  partnership,
                  and CNC  Investments,  Ltd.,  LLP, a Texas  limited  liability
                  partnership  and  Mayuri,  LLC a  Delaware  limited  liability
                  company dated October 13, 2005.  (Incorporated by reference to
                  Current Form 8-K dated October 28, 2005 and filed  November 3,
                  2005).

10.27             Third  Amendment of Purchase and Sale Contract  between Colony
                  of Springdale  Associates  Ltd., a Texas limited  partnership,
                  and CNC  Investments,  Ltd.,  LLP, a Texas  limited  liability
                  partnership  and  Mayuri,  LLC a  Delaware  limited  liability
                  company dated October 27, 2005.  (Incorporated by reference to
                  Current Form 8-K dated October 28, 2005 and filed  November 3,
                  2005).

31.1              Certification  of  equivalent  of  Chief  Executive  Officer
                  pursuant     to     Securities     Exchange     Act    Rules
                  13a-14(a)/15d-14(a),  as Adopted  Pursuant to Section 302 of
                  the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

31.2              Certification  of  equivalent  of  Chief  Financial  Officer
                  pursuant     to     Securities     Exchange     Act    Rules
                  13a-14(a)/15d-14(a),  as Adopted  Pursuant to Section 302 of
                  the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.



<PAGE>


32.1              Certification  of  the  equivalent  of the  Chief  Executive
                  Officer and Chief  Financial  Officer  Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
                  Section  1350,  as Adopted  Pursuant  to Section  906 of the
                  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

                 *Schedules and supplemental  materials to the exhibit have been
                  omitted but will be provided to the  Securities  and  Exchange
                  Commission upon request.


<PAGE>



Exhibit 31.1


                                  CERTIFICATION


I, Martha L. Long, certify that:


1.    I have  reviewed  this  quarterly  report on Form  10-QSB of  Consolidated
      Capital Properties VI;

2.    Based on my knowledge,  this report does not contain any untrue  statement
      of a material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary to make the
      statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
      were made,  not  misleading  with  respect  to the period  covered by this
      report;

3.    Based on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and other  financial
      information  included  in this  report,  fairly  present  in all  material
      respects the financial condition,  results of operations and cash flows of
      the small  business  issuer as of, and for, the periods  presented in this
      report;

4.    The  small  business  issuer's  other  certifying  officer(s)  and  I  are
      responsible  for  establishing  and  maintaining  disclosure  controls and
      procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules  13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for
      the small business issuer and have:

      (a)   Designed such  disclosure  controls and  procedures,  or caused such
            disclosure   controls  and  procedures  to  be  designed  under  our
            supervision,  to ensure that  material  information  relating to the
            small business issuer, including its consolidated  subsidiaries,  is
            made  known to us by  others  within  those  entities,  particularly
            during the period in which this report is being prepared;

      (b)   Evaluated  the   effectiveness   of  the  small  business   issuer's
            disclosure  controls and procedures and presented in this report our
            conclusions about the  effectiveness of the disclosure  controls and
            procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based
            on such evaluation; and

      (c)   Disclosed in this report any change in the small  business  issuer's
            internal  control over financial  reporting that occurred during the
            small  business  issuer's  most  recent  fiscal  quarter  (the small
            business  issuer's  fourth  fiscal  quarter in the case of an annual
            report) that has  materially  affected,  or is reasonably  likely to
            materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over
            financial reporting; and

5.    The  small  business  issuer's  other  certifying  officer(s)  and I  have
      disclosed,  based on our most recent  evaluation of internal  control over
      financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
      committee of the small  business  issuer's  board of directors (or persons
      performing the equivalent functions):

      (a)   All significant  deficiencies and material  weaknesses in the design
            or operation of internal control over financial  reporting which are
            reasonably  likely to adversely  affect the small business  issuer's
            ability  to  record,   process,   summarize  and  report   financial
            information; and

      (b)   Any fraud,  whether or not  material,  that  involves  management or
            other  employees who have a significant  role in the small  business
            issuer's internal control over financial reporting.

Date: November 14, 2005

                                    /s/Martha L. Long
                                    Martha L. Long
                                    Senior  Vice   President  of  ConCap
                                    Equities,  Inc.,  equivalent  of the
                                    chief   executive   officer  of  the
                                    Partnership


<PAGE>



Exhibit 31.2


                                  CERTIFICATION


I, Stephen B. Waters, certify that:


1.    I have  reviewed  this  quarterly  report on Form  10-QSB of  Consolidated
      Capital Properties VI;

2.    Based on my knowledge,  this report does not contain any untrue  statement
      of a material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary to make the
      statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
      were made,  not  misleading  with  respect  to the period  covered by this
      report;

3.    Based on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and other  financial
      information  included  in this  report,  fairly  present  in all  material
      respects the financial condition,  results of operations and cash flows of
      the small  business  issuer as of, and for, the periods  presented in this
      report;

4.    The  small  business  issuer's  other  certifying  officer(s)  and  I  are
      responsible  for  establishing  and  maintaining  disclosure  controls and
      procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules  13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for
      the small business issuer and have:

      (a)   Designed such  disclosure  controls and  procedures,  or caused such
            disclosure   controls  and  procedures  to  be  designed  under  our
            supervision,  to ensure that  material  information  relating to the
            small business issuer, including its consolidated  subsidiaries,  is
            made  known to us by  others  within  those  entities,  particularly
            during the period in which this report is being prepared;

      (b)   Evaluated  the   effectiveness   of  the  small  business   issuer's
            disclosure  controls and procedures and presented in this report our
            conclusions about the  effectiveness of the disclosure  controls and
            procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based
            on such evaluation; and

      (c)   Disclosed in this report any change in the small  business  issuer's
            internal  control over financial  reporting that occurred during the
            small  business  issuer's  most  recent  fiscal  quarter  (the small
            business  issuer's  fourth  fiscal  quarter in the case of an annual
            report) that has  materially  affected,  or is reasonably  likely to
            materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over
            financial reporting; and

5.    The  small  business  issuer's  other  certifying  officer(s)  and I  have
      disclosed,  based on our most recent  evaluation of internal  control over
      financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
      committee of the small  business  issuer's  board of directors (or persons
      performing the equivalent functions):

      (a)   All significant  deficiencies and material  weaknesses in the design
            or operation of internal control over financial  reporting which are
            reasonably  likely to adversely  affect the small business  issuer's
            ability  to  record,   process,   summarize  and  report   financial
            information; and

      (b)   Any fraud,  whether or not  material,  that  involves  management or
            other  employees who have a significant  role in the small  business
            issuer's internal control over financial reporting.

Date: November 14, 2005

                                    /s/Stephen B. Waters
                                    Stephen B. Waters
                                    Vice    President    of    ConCap
                                    Equities,   Inc.,  equivalent  of
                                    the chief  financial  officer  of
                                    the Partnership


<PAGE>


Exhibit 32.1


                          Certification of CEO and CFO
                       Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
                             As Adopted Pursuant to
                Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



In connection with the Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB of Consolidated  Capital
Properties VI (the "Partnership"),  for the quarterly period ended September 30,
2005 as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof
(the "Report"), Martha L. Long, as the equivalent of the chief executive officer
of the  Partnership,  and  Stephen B.  Waters,  as the  equivalent  of the chief
financial  officer of the  Partnership,  each hereby  certifies,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:

      (1)   The Report fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (2)   The  information  contained in the Report  fairly  presents,  in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Partnership.


                                           /s/Martha L. Long
                                    Name:  Martha L. Long
                                    Date:  November 14, 2005


                                           /s/Stephen B. Waters
                                    Name:  Stephen B. Waters
                                    Date:  November 14, 2005



This  certification is furnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.