The case of Charlie Mullins OBE
- Details
- Hits: 30
Can you lose an OBE for expressing political opinions?
Charlie Mullins' case offers a sobering insight into the risks now faced by individuals who dare to speak their minds in the public arena, particularly those who have been honoured for service to their community. What began as recognition for decades of hard work and life-changing impact has turned into a battle to preserve reputation, principle and free speech.
Charlie Mullins OBE: from plumbing apprentice to national recognition
Charlie’s background is one of grit and success. Raised in a South London council flat, he left school at 15, started a plumbing apprenticeship, and launched his business with borrowed tools. That business — Pimlico Plumbers — grew to be London’s most successful independent plumbing firm. It was built on values of hard work, training, and giving people real opportunities. Charlie gave jobs, skills, and futures to countless people. His work lifted many out of hardship, and his story inspired a generation of young entrepreneurs. In 2015, he was awarded an OBE for services to plumbing and for his social contributions.
Why was Charlie Mullins at risk of losing his honour?
Fast forward to today — and Charlie found himself under threat of forfeiting his OBE. The trigger? A few social media posts, taken out of context, and deemed offensive by a handful of complainants. There was no crime. No scandal. No breach of law. Just opinions.
How does the honours forfeiture committee work?
This case highlights a fundamental issue in the way the Forfeiture Committee operates. The process is carried out entirely in private. The accused is not invited to appear. There is no cross-examination, no opportunity to answer questions. You submit your response on paper — and that’s it. No reasons are given for decisions. No appeal exists. And all of this takes place away from public scrutiny.
Is the honours system politically biased?
A Government spokesperson insists the Forfeiture Committee is apolitical and that ministers play no role in its decisions. The official line is that the Committee is independent, impartial, and shielded from political pressure. However, the reality is more complicated. The public is given no insight into how decisions are made or why certain cases are pursued while others are ignored. The absence of transparency, combined with a noticeable shift in recent years towards investigating individuals based on statements or views rather than criminal wrongdoing, makes it difficult to accept the claim of neutrality without question. While the process may not be directed by politicians, its outcomes increasingly mirror the political climate — raising legitimate concerns about whether honours are now being used as a tool of control rather than a mark of service.
Legal defence against honour forfeiture: our case strategy
When we acted for Charlie, we treated the process with the seriousness and precision of a complex legal case. From the outset, we recognised that this was not a situation where assumptions or informal representations would suffice. Every word would count, every omission could have consequences, and every submission had to be watertight. We began with in-depth interviews to fully understand Charlie’s side of the story — the context, intent and impact of his public comments. We then gathered extensive documentary evidence to demonstrate his longstanding contributions to society and the values underpinning his award.
This included compiling records of his community work, press coverage, awards history, and tangible examples of people whose lives were positively changed by his business and mentorship. Character witnesses played a crucial role. We obtained written statements from respected individuals across public, private and charitable sectors who knew Charlie personally or professionally, and who were able to attest to his integrity, his positive influence, and the disproportionate nature of the proposed forfeiture. We also carried out a forensic comparison exercise, identifying other honours recipients who had engaged in far more serious misconduct — including convictions for fraud and sexual offences — and yet had not been stripped of their awards.
We analysed how political speech had rarely, if ever, been used as the basis for forfeiture, and highlighted the dangerous precedent being set. The result was a carefully structured legal bundle of several hundred pages, containing our full submission, all supporting evidence, and a detailed legal argument. We knew this was a one-shot process with no right of appeal, no oral hearing, and no opportunity for correction once submitted. Our approach had to be meticulous, precise, and absolutely compelling. This level of preparation is vital in any forfeiture case. You are not simply responding to a complaint — you are defending your public reputation, your honour, and often your life’s work.
What to do if you receive a letter from the honours forfeiture committee
If you receive a letter from the Honours Forfeiture Committee, treat it with the utmost seriousness. This is not a routine administrative enquiry — it is the start of a process that can strip you of national recognition and damage your personal and professional reputation. These letters are typically short and vague, offering little context or clarity about the concerns raised. Often, they refer to a few comments made online or events taken out of context.
Despite the lack of detail, the consequences can be severe. You must not assume that the truth will speak for itself or that the Committee will understand your intentions without your input. The process is entirely written, and you are not allowed to attend a hearing or offer explanations in person. You will not have an opportunity to question or clarify the allegations, and no appeal is available once the decision is made. That’s why it is essential to act swiftly and get specialist legal advice.
Your response must be thorough, well-reasoned and backed by evidence. It should not only explain your position but also provide broader context, highlight your achievements, and demonstrate the proportionality (or lack thereof) of any proposed action. A lawyer experienced in this area will help you build a structured, compelling submission and ensure nothing is missed. Time is short, and the stakes are high.
Above all, remember that this is a one-shot process. There are no second chances. What you submit is what will be judged. Get expert help and give yourself the best possible chance to protect your honour and everything it represents. Your honour is more than a medal. It is a statement of your life’s work and values. Defend it properly.
