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 0-11934


                          CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XVIII
        (Exact name of small business issuer as specified in its charter)



         California                                              94-2834149
(State or other jurisdiction of                               (I.R.S. Employer
 incorporation or organization)                              Identification No.)

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

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


Check  whether the issuer (i) 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


                          CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XVIII
                           CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
                                   (Unaudited)
                        (in thousands, except unit data)

                               September 30, 2005

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

Assets
<S>                                                                            <C>
   Cash and cash equivalents                                                   $ 37
   Receivables and deposits                                                       352
   Restricted escrows                                                             158
   Other assets                                                                   274
   Investment property:
      Land                                                     $ 6,218
      Buildings and related personal property                    12,838
                                                                 19,056
      Less accumulated depreciation                              (8,907)       10,149
                                                                             $ 10,970
Liabilities and Partners' (Deficiency) Capital
Liabilities
   Accounts payable                                                            $ 132
   Other liabilities                                                              163
   Accrued property taxes                                                         223
   Tenant security deposit liabilities                                             50
   Due to affiliates (Note B)                                                   2,830
   Mortgage note payable                                                        8,500

Partners' (Deficiency) Capital
   General partner                                             $ (5,425)
   Limited partners (75,000 units issued and
      outstanding)                                                4,497          (928)
                                                                             $ 10,970

            See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
</TABLE>



<PAGE>




                          CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XVIII
                      CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
                                   (Unaudited)
                      (in thousands, except per unit data)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                          Three Months Ended            Nine Months Ended
                                             September 30,                September 30,
                                          2005           2004           2005          2004
Revenues:
<S>                                      <C>            <C>           <C>            <C>
  Rental income                          $ 536          $ 458         $ 1,542        $ 1,391
  Other income                               54             83            152            230
  Casualty gain                               8             --              8             --
      Total revenues                        598            541          1,702          1,621

Expenses:
  Operating                                 446            338          1,036            910
  General and administrative                 52             36            164            144
  Depreciation                              142            123            416            366
  Interest                                  217            190            575            568
  Property tax                               74             83            223            239
      Total expenses                        931            770          2,414          2,227

Net loss                                 $ (333)        $ (229)        $ (712)       $ (606)

Net loss allocated to general
  partner (9.9%)                         $ (33)         $ (23)         $ (70)         $ (60)
Net loss allocated to limited
  partners (90.1%)                         (300)          (206)          (642)          (546)
                                         $ (333)        $ (229)        $ (712)       $ (606)

Net loss per limited partnership
  unit                                  $ (4.00)       $ (2.75)       $ (8.56)       $ (7.28)

            See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
</TABLE>



<PAGE>



                           CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XVIII
        CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' (DEFICIENCY) CAPITAL
                                   (Unaudited)
                        (in thousands, except unit data)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


                                     Limited
                                   Partnership    General      Limited
                                      Units       Partner      Partners      Total

<S>                                   <C>           <C>        <C>          <C>
Original capital contributions        75,000        $ --       $75,000      $75,000

Partners' (deficiency) capital
   at December 31, 2004               75,000      $(5,355)     $ 5,139       $ (216)

Net loss for the nine months
   ended September 30, 2005               --          (70)        (642)        (712)

Partners' (deficiency) capital
   at September 30, 2005              75,000      $(5,425)     $ 4,497       $ (928)

            See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
</TABLE>

<PAGE>



                          CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XVIII
                      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                                                       $ (712)     $ (606)
  Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net
   cash provided by (used in) operating activities:
     Depreciation                                                   416          366
     Bad debt expense                                                29          100
     Amortization of loan costs                                      49           26
     Casualty gain                                                   (8)          --
     Change in accounts:
      Receivables and deposits                                       69          (88)
      Other assets                                                  (24)         (73)
      Accounts payable                                               87           74
      Tenant security deposit liabilities                             9            1
      Due to affiliates                                             168            5
      Accrued property taxes                                        (94)         (75)
      Other liabilities                                              31           60
        Net cash provided by (used in) operating
           activities                                                20         (210)
Cash flows from investing activities:
  Property improvements and replacements                           (371)        (560)
  Insurance proceeds received                                        13           --
  Net deposits to restricted escrows                                (95)         (31)
        Net cash used in investing activities                      (453)        (591)

Cash flows from financing activities:
  Advances from affiliates                                          539          372
  Payments made to affiliates                                      (152)          --
  Loan costs paid                                                   (20)         (63)
  Payments on mortgage notes payable                                 --         (105)
        Net cash provided by financing activities                   367          204

Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents                           (66)        (597)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period                    103          683
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period                        $ 37        $ 86

Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
  Cash paid for interest                                         $ 451        $ 480
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash information:
  Property improvements and replacements included in
    accounts payable                                              $ 20        $ 52

At  December  31,  2004,  approximately  $12,000 of  property  improvements  and
replacements  were  included in accounts  payable which are included in property
improvements and replacements for the nine months ended September 30, 2005.

            See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
</TABLE>

<PAGE>


                          CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XVIII
                   NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
                                   (Unaudited)


Note A - Basis of Presentation

The  accompanying   unaudited   consolidated  financial  statements  of  Century
Properties Fund XVIII (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.  The Partnership's  general partner is Fox Partners.  The
general partners of Fox Partners are Fox Capital Management  Corporation ("FCMC"
or the  "Managing  General  Partner"),  Fox  Realty  Investors  ("FRI")  and Fox
Partners  82. The Managing  General  Partner,  as well as the  managing  general
partner of FRI, are affiliates of Apartment  Investment  and Management  Company
("AIMCO"), a publicly traded real estate investment trust. In the opinion of the
Managing  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 month periods 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  included in the Partnership's
Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004.

Reclassification:

Certain  balances  from  2004  have  been   reclassified  to  conform  to  the
2005 presentation.

Note B - Transactions with Affiliated Parties

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

Affiliates of the Managing 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  $83,000 and
$79,000 for the nine months  ended  September  30, 2005 and 2004,  respectively,
which is included in operating expenses.

An  affiliate  of  the  Managing   General   Partner   charged  the  Partnership
reimbursement of accountable  administrative expenses amounting to approximately
$104,000  and  $84,000 for the nine months  ended  September  30, 2005 and 2004,
respectively,  which is  included  in general and  administrative  expenses.  At
September 30, 2005,  approximately  $184,000 of reimbursements  for services and
associated  interest were accrued by the  Partnership and are included in due to
affiliates on the accompanying consolidated balance sheet.

As  compensation  for the  services  rendered in managing the  Partnership,  the
Managing  General  Partner is entitled to receive a Partnership  Management  Fee
equal to 9% of  distributions  from  operations  as defined  in the  Partnership
Agreement.  During the nine months ended September 30, 2005 and 2004, no amounts
were paid to the Managing General Partner as there were no distributions.

An  affiliate  of  the  Managing  General  Partner  has  made  available  to the
Partnership  a  credit  line  of  up to  $150,000  per  property  owned  by  the
Partnership.  During the nine  months  ended  September  30,  2005 and 2004,  an
affiliate of the Managing  General  Partner agreed to advance funds in excess of
the $150,000 line of credit to fund  operating  expenses of Oak Run  Apartments.
During the nine months ended  September  30, 2005 and 2004,  an affiliate of the
Managing  General Partner  advanced the Partnership  approximately  $539,000 and
$372,000,  respectively.  During the fourth quarter of 2004, an affiliate of the
Managing  General  Partner  agreed  to  advance  the  Partnership  approximately
$1,855,000  to cover  costs  associated  with  obtaining  a new  mortgage on the
property and to cover the deficiency between the existing mortgage payoff amount
and the new  mortgage.  During the nine months ended  September  30,  2005,  the
Partnership repaid approximately $152,000 for advances and approximately $80,000
for  accrued  interest.  At  September  30,  2005 the  outstanding  balance  was
approximately  $2,646,000  including accrued  interest.  Interest accrues at the
prime rate plus 2% (8.75% at September 30, 2005).  Interest  expense amounted to
approximately  $137,000 and $2,000 for the nine months ended  September 30, 2005
and 2004,  respectively.  Subsequent  to September 30, 2005, an affiliate of the
Managing  General  Partner agreed to advance  additional  funds in excess of the
credit line to cover  operational  expenses and capital  improvements at Oak Run
Apartments of approximately $189,000.

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 Managing  General  Partner.  During the nine months ended
September  30,  2005 and 2004,  the  Partnership  was  charged  by AIMCO and its
affiliates  approximately  $40,000 and $39,000 for  insurance  coverage and fees
associated with policy claims administration.

Note C - Casualty Gain

During the three and nine months ended  September  30, 2005, a net casualty gain
of  approximately  $8,000 was recorded at Oak Run Apartments.  The casualty gain
related to a fire, occurring in May 2005, which caused damage to one unit at the
property.  The gain was the  result of the  receipt  of  insurance  proceeds  of
approximately  $13,000 offset by approximately $5,000 of undepreciated  property
improvements and replacements being written off.

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 Managing  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  Managing  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  Managing  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
Managing  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
Managing  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.  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 Managing  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 Managing General Partner have
implemented a national  policy and  procedures to prevent or eliminate mold from
its properties  and the Managing  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 Managing 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  interest.  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
Managing  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.  The
following  table sets forth the average  occupancy  of the property for the nine
months ended September 30, 2005 and 2004.

                                                   Average Occupancy
      Property                                      2005       2004

      Oak Run Apartments                            84%        79%
        Dallas, Texas

Occupancy at Oak Run Apartments increased as a result of increased  advertising,
additional  leasing staff and a lowering of the average  rental rate to make the
property more competitive in its market area.

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  Managing  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 Managing  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  Managing  General  Partner  may  use  rental
concessions and rental rate reductions to offset  softening  market  conditions,
accordingly,  there is no guarantee  that the Managing  General  Partner will be
able to sustain such a plan.  Further, a number of factors which 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 recognized a net loss of approximately $333,000 and $712,000 for
the three and nine months ended  September 30, 2005  respectively  compared to a
net loss of  approximately  $229,000  and $606,000 for the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2004,  respectively.  The increase in net loss for the three
and  nine  months  ended  September  30,  2005 was due to an  increase  in total
expenses partially offset by an increase in total revenues.

Total revenues  increased for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2005
due to an increase in rental  income and  casualty  gain  partially  offset by a
decrease  in  other  income.  Rental  income  increased  due to an  increase  in
occupancy at Oak Run  Apartments  as discussed  above and a decrease in bad debt
expense  which were  partially  offset by a decrease in the average  rental rate
charged.  Other income  decreased due to decreases in lease  cancellation  fees,
late charges, and cleaning and damage fees at Oak Run Apartments.

During the three and nine months ended  September  30, 2005, a net casualty gain
of  approximately  $8,000 was recorded at Oak Run Apartments.  The casualty gain
related to a fire, occurring in May 2005, which caused damage to one unit at the
property.  The gain was the  result of the  receipt  of  insurance  proceeds  of
approximately  $13,000 offset by approximately $5,000 of undepreciated  property
improvements and replacements being written off.

Total expenses  increased for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2005
due to an increase in operating,  general and  administrative,  depreciation and
interest  expenses  partially  offset by a decrease  in  property  tax  expense.
Operating  expense  increased  due to an increase in  advertising  and  property
expenses. Advertising expense increased due to an increase in leasing promotions
in a effort to increase  occupancy levels.  Property expense increased due to an
increase in salaries and related benefits. Depreciation expense increased due to
property improvements and replacements being placed into service during the past
twelve months which are now being depreciated. Interest expense increased due to
an  increase  in interest on  advances  from  affiliates  partially  offset by a
decrease due to the  refinancing of the mortgage  encumbering Oak Run Apartments
in October 2004 as discussed  below.  Property  tax expense  decreased  due to a
decrease in the estimated  2005 property taxes at Oak Run Apartments as a result
of a lower tax rate for the county taxes.

General  and  administrative  expenses  increased  for the three and nine months
ended  September  30,  2005 due to an  increase  in  accountable  reimbursements
charged by an affiliate of the Managing  General  Partner in accordance with the
Partnership  Agreement.  In addition,  costs  associated  with the quarterly and
annual  communications  with  investors and  regulatory  agencies and the annual
audit required by the Partnership Agreement are also included.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

At  September  30,  2005,  the  Partnership  had cash and  cash  equivalents  of
approximately $ 37,000 compared to approximately  $86,000 at September 30, 2004.
Cash and cash equivalents decreased approximately $66,000 from December 31, 2004
due to  approximately  $453,000 of cash used in investing  activities  partially
offset by  approximately  $367,000 and $20,000 of cash provided by financing and
operating activities,  respectively. Cash used in investing activities consisted
of property improvements and replacements and net deposits to restricted escrows
maintained  by the  mortgage  lender  partially  offset  by  insurance  proceeds
received.  Cash  provided by financing  activities  consisted  of advances  from
affiliates  partially  offset by the repayment of advances from  affiliates  and
payment of additional loan costs.  The  Partnership  invests its working capital
reserves in interest bearing accounts.

An  affiliate  of  the  Managing  General  Partner  has  made  available  to the
Partnership  a  credit  line  of  up to  $150,000  per  property  owned  by  the
Partnership.  During the nine  months  ended  September  30,  2005 and 2004,  an
affiliate of the Managing  General  Partner agreed to advance funds in excess of
the $150,000 line of credit to fund  operating  expenses of Oak Run  Apartments.
During the nine months ended  September  30, 2005 and 2004,  an affiliate of the
Managing  General Partner  advanced the Partnership  approximately  $539,000 and
$372,000,  respectively.  During the fourth quarter of 2004, an affiliate of the
Managing  General  Partner  agreed  to  advance  the  Partnership  approximately
$1,855,000  to cover  costs  associated  with  obtaining  a new  mortgage on the
property and an amount to cover the  deficiency  between the  existing  mortgage
payoff amount and the new mortgage.  During the nine months ended  September 30,
2005,  the   Partnership   repaid   approximately   $152,000  for  advances  and
approximately   $80,000  for  accrued  interest.   At  September  30,  2005  the
outstanding  balance was  approximately  $2,646,000  including accrued interest.
Interest  accrues  at the prime  rate plus 2% (8.75%  at  September  30,  2005).
Interest  expense  amounted to  approximately  $137,000  and $2,000 for the nine
months ended September 30, 2005 and 2004, respectively.  Subsequent to September
30,  2005,  an  affiliate  of the  Manging  General  Partner  agreed to  advance
additional funds in excess of the credit line to cover operational  expenses and
capital improvements at Oak Run Apartments of approximately $189,000.

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  Managing  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.  The Partnership  expects that it will incur higher  expenses  related to
compliance.  Capital  improvements  planned for the  Partnership's  property are
detailed below.

During the nine  months  ended  September  30,  2005 the  Partnership  completed
approximately  $379,000 of capital improvements at Oak Run Apartments consisting
primarily of signage,  counter tops, floor covering and appliance  replacements,
exterior  improvements,  and golf  carts.  These  improvements  were funded from
operations,   replacement  reserves,  advances  from  affiliates  and  insurance
proceeds.  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 additional capital  expenditures will be incurred only to the extent of cash
available from  operations  and  Partnership  reserves.  To the extent that such
capital improvements are completed,  the Partnership's  distributable cash flow,
if any, may be adversely affected at least in the short term.

The  Partnership's  assets are thought to be sufficient for any near-term  needs
(exclusive of capital improvements) of the Partnership.  On October 1, 2004, the
Partnership  obtained a mortgage of $8,500,000 on its sole investment  property,
Oak  Run  Apartments,  located  in  Dallas,  Texas.  The  existing  mortgage  of
approximately $9,728,000 matured on October 1, 2004 and was repaid with proceeds
from the new mortgage and an additional loan of approximately $1,918,000,  which
was  funded  by an  affiliate  of the  Partnership's  Managing  General  Partner
("Affiliate  Loan")  to cover  closing  costs  and the  deficiency  between  the
existing  mortgage  payoff amount and the new mortgage.  The Affiliate Loan is a
demand note that bears  interest  at the prime rate plus 2% (8.75% at  September
30, 2005). The new mortgage requires monthly payments of interest which began on
November 1, 2004 until the loan matures  October 1, 2007,  with  interest  being
equal to the average of London  Interbank  Offered Rates for a term of one month
plus 285 basis points (minimum rate of 4.69%).  In conjunction with the mortgage
note, the Partnership paid approximately  $30,000 to enter into an interest rate
cap  agreement,  which  limited the  Partnership's  exposure  to  interest  rate
increases.  Under this interest rate cap agreement,  the Partnership's  interest
rate on the  amounts  owed to the  lender  will be no higher  than  8.85%.  This
agreement  expires  October 1, 2007. The  Partnership  has adopted SFAS No. 133,
"Accounting  for  Derivative  Instruments  and  Hedging  Activities",  which was
amended by SFAS No. 138  "Accounting  for  Certain  Derivative  Instruments  and
Certain  Hedging  Activities - an Amendment of SFAS No. 133". The  Partnership's
interest  rate cap does not qualify for special  hedge  accounting  treatment as
defined by SFAS 133, and therefore all changes in the fair value of the interest
rate cap will be recognized in the  consolidated  statements of operations as an
adjustment to interest  expense.  In addition the new mortgage  requires monthly
escrow deposits for taxes, insurance and replacement reserves. As a condition of
making the new mortgage,  the lender required an affiliate of the Partnership to
guarantee the obligations and liabilities of the Partnership with respect to the
new mortgage.

There were no distributions  during the nine months ended September 30, 2005 and
2004. Future cash distributions will depend on the levels of cash generated from
operations,  and  the  timing  of  the  debt  maturity,   property  sale  and/or
refinancing.  The Partnership's cash available for distribution is reviewed on a
monthly basis.  In light of the amounts accrued and payable to affiliates of the
Managing  General Partner at September 30, 2005,  there can be no assurance that
the Partnership  will generate  sufficient  funds from operations  after capital
improvements  to  permit  any  distributions  to its  partners  during  2005  or
subsequent periods.

Other

In addition to its indirect  ownership of the general  partner  interests in the
Partnership,  AIMCO and its affiliates owned 42,694.50 limited partnership units
(the "Units") in the Partnership  representing  56.93% of the total  outstanding
Units at September 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.  Under the Partnership
Agreement,  unitholders  holding a majority  of the Units are  entitled  to take
action  with  respect to a variety  of  matters,  which  would  include  without
limitation, voting on certain amendments to the Partnership Agreement and voting
to remove the Managing General  Partner.  As a result of its ownership of 56.93%
of the total outstanding  Units,  AIMCO is in a position to influence all voting
decisions with respect to the Registrant.  AIMCO IPLP, L.P.,  formerly  Insignia
Properties L.P. ("IPLP"), an affiliate of AIMCO and the Managing General Partner
indirectly,  had agreed for the benefit of  non-tendering  unitholders,  that it
would vote the 21,513 Units  acquired in January 1996:  (i) against any increase
in compensation  payable to the Managing  General Partner or to affiliates;  and
(ii) on all other matters  submitted by it or its  affiliates,  in proportion to
the votes cast by non-tendering unitholders.  Except for the foregoing, no other
limitations are imposed on IPLP's,  AIMCO's or any of their  affiliates right to
vote each Unit acquired.  Although the Managing  General  Partner owes fiduciary
duties to the limited partners of the Partnership,  the Managing General Partner
also owes fiduciary duties to AIMCO as its sole  stockholder.  As a result,  the
duties of the Managing  General Partner,  as managing  general  partner,  to the
Partnership  and its limited  partners may come into conflict with the duties of
the Managing 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

Investment property is recorded at cost, less accumulated  depreciation,  unless
considered  impaired.  If events or  circumstances  indicate  that the  carrying
amount of the 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 Managing  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  Managing  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  Managing  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
Managing  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
Managing  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.

<PAGE>

                                   SIGNATURES

In  accordance  with  Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange  Act,  the  Registrant
caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly
authorized.


                                    CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XVIII


                                    By:   Fox Partners
                                          General Partner


                                    By:   Fox Capital Management Corporation
                                          Managing 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>


                          CENTURY PROPERTIES FUND XVIII

                                  EXHIBIT INDEX


Exhibit Number    Description of Exhibit


2.5  Master Indemnity  Agreement  Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed by
     Insignia Financial Group, Inc. with the Securities and Exchange  Commission
     on September 1, 1995.

3.4  Agreement of Limited Partnership  Incorporated by reference to Exhibit A to
     the  Prospectus  of the  Registrant  dated  November  5,  1982,  as revised
     December 30, 1982,  and after  supplemented  contained in the  Registrant's
     Agreement on Form S-11 (Reg. No. 2-78495).

3.4a Amendment  to the  Limited  Partnership  Agreement  dated  April  4,  2005.
     Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Form 10-QSB for the quarterly
     period ended March 31, 2005.

10.7 Loan  Agreement  dated  September  30, 2004 between Oak Run,  L.P., a South
     Carolina   limited   partnership   and  GMAC   Commercial   Mortgage  Bank.
     Incorporated  by reference to the  Registrant's  Form 8-K dated  October 1,
     2004.

10.8 Promissory  Note dated  September  30, 2004  between Oak Run L.P.,  a South
     Carolina   limited   partnership   and  GMAC   Commercial   Mortgage  Bank.
     Incorporated  by reference to the  Registrant's  Form 8-K dated  October 1,
     2004.

10.9 Guaranty  dated  September  30,  2004 by AIMCO  Properties,  L.P.,  for the
     benefit of GMAC Commercial Mortgage Bank.  Incorporated by reference to the
     Registrant's Form 8-K dated October 1, 2004.

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 Century Properties
      Fund XVIII;

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  Fox  Capital
                                Management  Corporation,  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 Century Properties
      Fund XVIII;

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 Fox Capital Management
                                    Corporation, 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 Century  Properties
Fund XVIII (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.