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 June 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 ___

                         PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION


ITEM 1.     Financial Statements


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

                                  June 30, 2005

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


Assets
<S>                                                                           <C>
   Cash and cash equivalents                                                  $ 4
   Receivables and deposits                                                      27
   Other assets                                                                 150
   Investment property:
      Land                                                    $ 916
      Buildings and related personal property                 11,586
                                                              12,502
      Less accumulated depreciation                           (6,782)         5,720

                                                                            $ 5,901
Liabilities and Partners' Deficit
Liabilities
   Accounts payable                                                          $ 215
   Tenant security deposit liabilities                                           73
   Accrued property taxes                                                        64
   Other liabilities                                                             89
   Due to affiliates (Note B)                                                   814
   Mortgage note payable                                                      4,784

Partners' Deficit
   General partner                                             $ (2)
   Special limited partners                                      (79)
   Limited partners (181,300 units issued and
      outstanding)                                               (57)          (138)

                                                                            $ 5,901


         See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
</TABLE>



<PAGE>




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

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


                                          Three Months                 Six Months
                                         Ended June 30,              Ended June 30,
                                       2005          2004          2005          2004
Revenues:
<S>                                    <C>           <C>           <C>          <C>
   Rental income                       $ 408         $ 403         $ 823        $ 830
   Other income                            63            63           107          114
   Casualty gain (Note C)                  --             4            20            9
       Total revenues                     471           470           950          953

Expenses:
   Operating                              250           215           460          388
   General and administrative              43            46            77          100
   Depreciation                           125           117           244          234
   Interest                               108            99           213          198
   Property taxes                          32            29            64           59
       Total expenses                     558           506         1,058          979

Net loss                               $ (87)        $ (36)       $ (108)       $ (26)

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

Net loss allocated to
   limited partners (99.8%)               (87)          (36)         (108)         (26)

                                       $ (87)        $ (36)       $ (108)       $ (26)

Net loss per limited
   partnership unit                   $ (0.48)      $ (0.20)      $ (0.60)     $ (0.14)
Distributions per limited
   partnership unit                    $ --          $ --          $ --         $ 0.57


         See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
</TABLE>



<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 six months
   ended June 30, 2005                   --          --         --       (108)       (108)

Partners' deficit
   at June 30, 2005                 181,300       $ (2)      $ (79)    $ (57)     $ (138)


         See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
</TABLE>



<PAGE>




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

                                                                   Six Months Ended
                                                                        June 30,
                                                                       2005    2004
Cash flows from operating activities:
<S>                                                               <C>         <C>
  Net loss                                                        $ (108)     $ (26)
  Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided
   by operating activities:
     Depreciation                                                     244        234
     Amortization of loan costs                                         3          3
     Casualty gain                                                    (20)        (9)
     Change in accounts:
      Receivables and deposits                                         (1)        (7)
      Other assets                                                    (23)       (45)
      Accounts payable                                                 68        (40)
      Tenant security deposit liabilities                             (12)        --
      Accrued property taxes                                          (62)       (65)
      Other liabilities                                               (38)        58
      Due to affiliates                                                70        (67)
         Net cash provided by operating activities                    121         36

Cash flows from investing activities:
  Property improvements and replacements                             (439)      (101)
  Insurance proceeds received                                          21         16
         Net cash used in investing activities                       (418)       (85)

Cash flows from financing activities:
  Payments on mortgage note payable                                   (89)       (69)
  Advances from affiliates                                            330         --
  Distributions paid to partners                                       --       (107)
         Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities          241       (176)

Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents                             (56)      (225)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period                       60        243
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period                          $ 4        $ 18

Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
  Cash paid for interest                                           $ 188      $ 162
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash activity:
  Property improvements and replacements included in
   accounts payable                                                $ 118       $ 59

Included in property improvements and replacements for the six months ended June
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
</TABLE>



<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 six months  ended June 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.

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  $45,000 and
$46,000 for the six months ended June 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  $91,000 and
$63,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, respectively,  which is
included in general and  administrative  expenses and investment  property.  The
portion of these  reimbursements  included in  investment  property  for the six
months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004 are fees related to construction  management
services  provided  by an  affiliate  of the  General  Partner of  approximately
$40,000 and $1,000,  respectively.  The construction management service fees are
calculated  based on a  percentage  of  additions  to the  investment  property.
Approximately  $109,000  of the  accountable  administrative  expenses  remained
unpaid as of June 30, 2005 and are included in due to affiliates.

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 six months
ended June 30, 2004 which is included in general and administrative expenses. No
such fee was  earned for the six  months  ended  June 30,  2005 as there were no
operating distributions.

During the six months ended June 30, 2005,  the  Partnership  received  advances
from an affiliate of the General Partner of approximately $330,000. Interest was
charged  at the prime  rate plus 2% (8.25%  at June 30,  2005) and  amounted  to
approximately  $19,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2005. At June 30, 2005,
the amount of outstanding loans and accrued interest was approximately  $705,000
and is  included  in due to  affiliates.  There were no loans  from the  General
Partner or  associated  interest  expense  during the six months  ended June 30,
2004.

Subsequent  to June 30,  2005,  the General  Partner  advanced  the  Partnership
approximately $162,000 for capital improvements and operating costs at Colony of
Springdale Apartments.

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 six months ended June 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 six months ended
June 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.

During  the six  months  ended  June 30,  2005,  there  was a  casualty  gain of
approximately  $20,000  recorded at the property  related to a fire that damaged
two  apartment  units in April 2004.  This gain was the result of the receipt of
remaining  insurance  proceeds of approximately  $21,000,  less the write off of
additional undepreciated property and improvements of approximately $1,000.

Note D - 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 Appeal reversed the trial court's order striking the
first amended complaint.

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.

As previously disclosed,  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  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. On June 23, 2005 the Court  conditionally  certified  the  collective
action  on both the  on-call  and  overtime  issues.  The  Court  ruling  allows
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.  Defendants have
asked the Court to  reconsider  its  ruling or in the  alternative  certify  the
ruling for appeal on that issue. After the notice goes out, defendants will have
the  opportunity to move to decertify the collective  action.  The Court further
denied plaintiffs' Motion for Certification of the state subclass.  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 Operations

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. The average occupancy for
the six  month  periods  ended  June  30,  2005  and  2004,  was  88%  and  91%,
respectively.  The General  Partner  attributes the decrease in occupancy at the
property to a more stringent tenant  acceptance policy in order to create a more
stable customer base.

The  Partnership's  financial  results depend 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. As part of the ongoing business plan of
the Partnership,  the General Partner monitors 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.  As part of this plan,  the General  Partner  attempts 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 use  rental  concessions  and  rental  rate
reductions  to offset  softening  market  conditions,  accordingly,  there is no
guarantee that the General Partner will be able to sustain such a plan. 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 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 was
approximately  $87,000  and  $108,000  compared  to a net loss of  approximately
$36,000 and $26,000 for the  corresponding  periods in 2004. The increase in net
loss for the three and six months  ended June 30, 2005 was  primarily  due to an
increase in total  expenses.  The  increase in net loss for the six months ended
June  30,  2005  was also due to a  slight  decrease  in total  revenues.  Total
revenues remained relatively constant for the three months ended June 30, 2005.

Total expenses increased for the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 due to
an increase in operating, depreciation and interest expenses partially offset by
a decrease in general and administrative expenses.  Operating expenses increased
primarily  due to an increase in property  and  maintenance  expenses  partially
offset by a decrease in advertising expenses.  The increase in property expenses
is primarily due to increased salaries and related benefits and utility expenses
at the Partnership's property. The increase in maintenance expenses is primarily
due to an increase in contract  services and damage repairs at the Partnership's
property.  The decrease in advertising expense is due to decreased newspaper and
periodical  advertisements.  The increase in depreciation  expense was primarily
due to fixed asset  additions  being  placed into  service  over the past twelve
months at the  Partnership's  property.  The  increase  in  interest  expense is
primarily  due to increases in interest  incurred on advances  from  affiliates.
There were no advances during the six months ended June 30, 2004.

General and  administrative  expenses decreased 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 six  months  ended  June 30,  2005.  The  decrease  in  general  and
administrative  expenses  is also  due to a  decrease  in the  cost of  services
included in the  management  reimbursements  to the  General  Partner as allowed
under the  Partnership  Agreement.  Also included in general and  administrative
expenses are costs associated with the quarterly and annual  communications with
investors  and  regulatory  agencies  and  the  annual  audit  required  by  the
Partnership Agreement. .

The  decrease  in total  revenues  for the six  months  ended  June 30,  2005 is
primarily  due to decreases in rental and other income,  partially  offset by an
increase  in  casualty  gain  (as  discussed  below).  Rental  income  decreased
primarily due to a decrease in occupancy, partially offset by an increase in the
average  rental rates and a decrease in bad debt expense at the property.  Other
income decreased  primarily due to a decrease 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 six months ended
June 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.

During  the six  months  ended  June 30,  2005,  there  was a  casualty  gain of
approximately  $20,000  recorded at the property  related to a fire that damaged
two  apartment  units in April 2004.  This gain was the result of the receipt of
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 June 30, 2005, the Partnership had cash and cash equivalents of approximately
$4,000  compared  to  approximately  $18,000  at June  30,  2004.  Cash and cash
equivalents  decreased by  approximately  $56,000 since December 31, 2004 due to
approximately $418,000 of cash used in investing activities, partially offset by
approximately  $241,000 and $121,000 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.

The sufficiency of existing  liquid assets to meet future  liquidity and capital
expenditure   requirements   is  directly   related  to  the  level  of  capital
expenditures required at the property to adequately maintain the physical assets
and other operating needs of the Partnership and to comply with Federal,  state,
and local  legal and  regulatory  requirements.  The  General  Partner  monitors
developments in the area of legal and regulatory  compliance.  For example,  the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 mandates or suggests  additional  compliance measures
with regard to governance,  disclosure, audit and other areas. In light of these
changes,  the Partnership  expects that it will incur higher expenses related to
compliance.  Capital  improvements  planned for the  Partnership's  property are
discussed below.

During  the  six  months  ended  June  30,  2005,  the   Partnership   completed
approximately   $546,000  of  capital   improvements  at  Colony  of  Springdale
Apartments,  consisting primarily of vinyl siding, floor covering  replacements,
balcony  replacements,  structural  improvements  and roof  replacements.  These
improvements  were funded  from  operating  cash flow,  insurance  proceeds  and
advances  from  affiliates.  The  Partnership  regularly  evaluates  the capital
improvement  needs  of the  property.  While  the  Partnership  has no  material
commitments for property improvements and replacements,  certain routine capital
expenditures are anticipated during 2005. Such capital  expenditures will depend
on the  physical  condition  of the  property as well as  anticipated  cash flow
generated by the property.

The  Partnership's  assets are thought to be sufficient  for any near term needs
(exclusive  of  capital   improvements)   of  the   Partnership.   The  mortgage
indebtedness  encumbering the Partnership's property of approximately $4,784,000
matures in November  2019 at which time the  mortgage is  scheduled  to be fully
amortized.

The Partnership  distributed  the following  amounts during the six months ended
June 30, 2005 and 2004 (in thousands, except per unit data):

                   Six Months        Per           Six Months          Per
                     Ended         Limited           Ended           Limited
                    June 30,     Partnership        June 30,       Partnership
                      2005          Unit              2004             Unit
   Operations        $  --         $  --             $ 107            $ 0.57

Future  cash  distributions  will  depend on the levels of cash  generated  from
operations, and the timing of the debt maturity,  refinancing and/or sale of the
property.  The  Partnership's  cash available for  distribution is reviewed on a
monthly  basis.  There can be no assurance  that the  Partnership  will generate
sufficient funds from operations  after required capital  expenditures to permit
any distributions to its partners in 2005 or subsequent periods.

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
June 30, 2005. A number of these Units were  acquired  pursuant to tender offers
made by AIMCO or its  affiliates.  It is possible  that AIMCO or its  affiliates
will acquire  additional Units in exchange for cash or a combination of cash and
units in AIMCO  Properties,  L.P., the operating  partnership  of AIMCO,  either
through  private  purchases  or  tender  offers.  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 may be  impaired,  the  Partnership  will make an
assessment of its  recoverability  by estimating  the  undiscounted  future cash
flows,  excluding  interest  charges,  of the property.  If the carrying  amount
exceeds the aggregate  future cash flows,  the  Partnership  would  recognize an
impairment  loss to the extent the carrying amount exceeds the fair value of the
property.

Real  property  investments  are  subject  to varying  degrees of risk.  Several
factors  may  adversely  affect  the  economic  performance  and  value  of  the
Partnership's  investment  property.  These factors include, but are not limited
to,  changes  in the  national,  regional  and  local  economic  climate;  local
conditions,  such as an oversupply of multifamily  properties;  competition from
other available  multifamily property owners and changes in market rental rates.
Any adverse changes in these factors could cause impairment of the Partnership's
asset.

Revenue Recognition

The Partnership generally leases apartment units for twelve-month terms or less.
The Partnership will offer 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, is recognized on a
straight-line  basis over the term of the lease.  The Partnership  evaluates all
accounts  receivable  from  residents and  establishes  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 Appeal reversed the trial court's order striking the
first amended complaint.

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.

As previously disclosed,  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  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. The defendants have filed an answer to the amended  complaint denying
the substantive allegations.  On June 23, 2005 the Court conditionally certified
the collective action on both the on-call and overtime issues.  The Court ruling
allows  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.  Defendants have
asked the Court to  reconsider  its  ruling or in the  alternative  certify  the
ruling for appeal on that issue. After the notice goes out, defendants will have
the  opportunity to move to decertify the collective  action.  The Court further
denied plaintiffs' Motion for Certification of the state subclass.  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: August 12, 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.)

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.

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.


<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: August 12, 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: August 12, 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 June 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:  August 12, 2005


                                           /s/Stephen B. Waters
                                    Name:  Stephen B. Waters
                                    Date:  August 12, 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.