UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SECURITIES ACT OF 1933

Release No. 10360 / May 12, 2017

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING

File No. 3-17986

In the Matter of

the Registration Statement of 

Universal Movers Corp.

125 Beech Hall Road

London, Greater London E4 

9NN, UK

Respondent.

ORDER FIXING TIME AND PLACE

OF PUBLIC HEARING AND

INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS

PURSUANT TO SECTION 8(d) OF THE

SECURITIES ACT OF 1933

I.

The Commission’s public official files disclose that:

On October 25, 2013, Universal Movers Corp. (“Respondent”) filed a Form S-1 

registration statement seeking to register the offer and sale of 3,000,000 common shares in a 

$60,000 public offering. Respondent filed amendments to its registration statements dated 

November 26, 2013, and December 16, 2013 (together, the “Registration Statement”). The 

Registration Statement was deemed effective on December 27, 2013. 

II.

After an investigation and examination, the Division of Enforcement alleges that: 

A. RESPONDENT

1. Respondent is a Nevada corporation headquartered in London, England. 
2

2. Respondent purportedly plans to provide moving and storage services at set rates

based on mileage. The company has no revenue, no business operations and has not publicly sold 

any shares. 

B. FAILURE TO COOPERATE WITH SECTION 8(e) EXAMINATION

3. On April 24, 2014, Commission staff issued a document subpoena to Respondent. 

The subpoena was properly served on company counsel, who resides in the United States, on that 

date. 

4. On May 9, 2014, company counsel informed the staff that he had been authorized 

to represent Respondent in the staff’s ongoing examination, but that the company had sent its 

response to the document subpoena directly to the staff. 

5. The company’s document production was received on May 7, 2014.

6. On May 13, 2014, staff contacted company counsel and informed him that the staff 

intended to take testimony from Respondent’s Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”).

7. On May 16, 2014, the staff properly served a testimony subpoena to Respondent’s 

CEO via company counsel, who resides in the United States.

8. During the subsequent months, the staff, through company counsel, attempted to 

schedule the taking of testimony from Respondent’s CEO.

9. On August 8, 2014, company counsel emailed the staff and stated that 

Respondent’s CEO did not intend to provide testimony to the staff.

10. On May 19, 2016, company counsel informed the staff that he was no longer 

representing the Respondent.

11. On May 24, 2016, the staff attempted to email Respondent directly at the email 

address provided in its S-1 filing. The staff’s email was returned as undeliverable.

12. On June 8, 2016, the staff called the telephone number provided by Respondent in 

its Registration Statement and was told by the individual who answered the phone that it was the

wrong number.

13. On July 11, 2016, the staff sent a notice informing the company of the staff’s 

preliminary determination to recommend an enforcement action against Respondent to the 

company’s designated agent for service in the United States and directly to the company address in 

the United Kingdom.

14. On July 20, 2016, the staff received an email from an individual in the United 

Kingdom stating that Respondent’s CEO did not live at the address to which the notice was sent.
3

15. On October 13, 2016, the UPS package sent to the Respondent’s agent for service 

of process in the United States was returned. On the returned package, there was a note stating that

the “receiver did not want, refused delivery.”

16. As a result of the conduct described in paragraphs nine through twelve above, 

Respondent failed to cooperate with the staff’s examination

III.

The Commission, having considered the aforesaid, deems it appropriate and in the public 

interest that public proceedings pursuant to Section 8(d) of the Securities Act be instituted with 

respect to the Registration Statement to determine whether the allegations of the Division of 

Enforcement are true; to afford the Respondent with an opportunity to establish any defenses to 

these allegations; and to determine whether a stop order should issue suspending the effectiveness 

of the Registration Statement referred to herein.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that public proceedings be and hereby are instituted under 

Section 8(d) of the Securities Act, such hearing to be commenced at 9:30 a.m. on June 1, 2017, at 

the Commission’s offices at 100 F Street N.E., Washington, DC 20549, and to continue thereafter 

at such time and place as the hearing officer may determine.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that these proceedings shall be presided over by an

Administrative Law Judge to be designated by further order, who is authorized to perform all the 

duties of an Administrative Law Judge as set forth in the Commission’s Rules of Practice or as 

otherwise provided by law.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Respondent shall file an Answer to the allegations 

contained in this Order within ten (10) days after service of this Order, pursuant to Rule 220 of the 

Commission's Rules of Practice, 17 C.F.R. § 201.220. If the Respondent fails to file the directed 

answer, or fails to appear at a hearing after being duly notified, the Respondent may be deemed in 

default and the proceedings may be determined against the Respondent upon consideration of this 

Order, the allegations of which may be deemed to be true as provided by Rules 155(a), 220(f), 

221(f) and 310 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, 17 C.F.R. §§201.155(a), 201.220(f), 

201.221(f) and 201.310. This Order shall be served forthwith upon the Respondent in accordance 

with Rule 141 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, 17 C.F.R. §201.141.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Administrative Law Judge shall issue an initial 

decision no later than 120 days from the occurrence of one of the following events: (A) The 

completion of post-hearing briefing in a proceeding where the hearing has been completed; (B) 

Where the hearing officer has determined that no hearing is necessary, upon completion of briefing 

on a motion pursuant to Rule 250 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, 17 C.F.R. § 201.250; or 

(C) The determination by the hearing officer that a party is deemed to be in default under Rule 155 

of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, 17 C.F.R. § 201.155 and no hearing is necessary.
4

In the absence of an appropriate waiver, no officer or employee of the Commission 

engaged in the performance of investigative or prosecuting functions in this or any factually related 

proceeding will be permitted to participate or advise in the decision of this matter, except as 

witness or counsel in proceedings held pursuant to notice. Since this proceeding is not “rule 

making” within the meaning of Section 551 of the Administrative Procedure Act, it is not deemed 

subject to the provisions of Section 553 delaying the effective date of any final Commission action.

By the Commission.

Brent J. Fields

Secretary