Chris Morgan talks to Angela Faherty about his specialist IFA business and his campaigning role as editor of pinkfinance.com
Steadfast and focussed, Chris Morgan is hoping to bring about change. As editor of pinkfinance.com, Morgan has recently submitted his formal response to the Association of British Insurers' (ABI) consultation on the statement of best practice for HIV and insurance. He hopes the paper will help to eradicate the discrimination many gay men feel when applying for protection.
In addition to his campaigning role, Morgan also heads his own advisory practice, Compass Independent Financial Advisors. It predominantly caters for the gay and lesbian market; 95% of his clients are from the gay community. Morgan's decision to launch the practice was prompted by both personal and commercial reasons.
"At Barclays, I had a lot of gay people in London coming to me for advice. I found that in bancassurance in general, a lot of the policies were highly discriminative, especially surrounding critical illness (CI), life assurance and income protection (IP) cover. So, I decided to create an alternative in that market."
Four years since its launch, Compass continues to gain ground. The firm deals predominantly with protection business, but is also licensed in pensions and investments. The client base is growing and Morgan is proud of his achievement.
"Our reputation stands for itself. People come to us because they like what we stand for, because they agree with our stance and with what we are trying to do. I have very much made gay people's rights my business in relation to insurance.
"It is my community. I am far more comfortable dealing with like-minded people and I am sure they feel the same. That is a choice I have made because there are not enough gay financial advisers and I prefer to concentrate on helping gay people overcome discriminatory issues."
Morgan hopes his campaigning through pinkfinance.com will help to achieve this. His involvement with the ABI has enabled him to offer his help in developing new guidelines in relation to HIV and insurance, which will effect the way gay men are treated going forward.
"The guidelines section that directly relates to gay men has been composed by myself and I take responsibility for that. There are a number of aspects that are a direct result of the way my clients have been treated and if handled wrongly, it could be quite damaging to the industry," he says.
One of the issues that Morgan is keen to eradicate from the industry is the use of an individual's occupation as a sign of their risk exposure to HIV. Morgan cites a certain case where an insurer has questioned one of his clients because he was a cabin crew member. While no insurer will admit to such practices, Morgan says he has proof.
"All the insurers are denying it, but the case is there. I wouldn't say it is widespread. Instead, you have individual underwriters acting in a bigoted way outside of general policy. It is more to do with an individual underwriter's interpretation of a case, and that must be stopped," he says.
Similarly, speculative questioning of a client's GP and questions relating to past HIV tests is something Morgan is keen to see outlawed. While the current guidelines propose that insurers should not ask if someone has previously had an HIV test - only if they have tested positive - Morgan says this still occurs.
"Insurers have it the wrong way round. The fact that somebody is regularly testing for HIV is a sure sign that they are practising safe responsible behaviour and they have a responsible attitude towards their sexual health."
Morgan also believes supplementary questions relating to length of sexual relationships, number of partners and monogamy need eradicating.
"The length of a relationship is no indication to safe and responsible behaviour between two people. Even the number of sexual partners is no indication. Someone could have multiple sexual partners and practice safe sex and another could have two sexual partners and practice unsafe sex."
With the new guidelines, it is being suggested that a new way of determining normal rates for gay men is through civil partnership, adoption and share of the bills. Morgan feels this is unacceptable and is adamant it will not be passed.
"I have statistics, which indicate that gay men in relationships are at a higher risk to HIV infection than single gay men. A piece of paper does not mean that somebody is at any less risk to HIV infection," he says.
Morgan acknowledges that this issue is not confined to the gay community. He points out that it is not unusual for heterosexual, bisexual people and those with children to have sex outside their relationships, and that the onus of the new guidelines should be on safe sexual behaviour.
"The one factor that relates to the risk that HIV represents to the life assurance industry is safe sexual behaviour. Everybody applying for life cover should be asked whether they have always practiced safe sexual behaviour." He adds: "There is no doubt that a definition of what deems safe sexual behaviour needs to be put in the application form."
One of the major influences for change in the consultation has been the shift in the groups considered to pose a higher risk to HIV infection. With the advent of HIV in the UK, gay men were considered to pose the greatest risk to contracting the illness. However, the tide is changing and one of the greatest risk groups is now people who have travelled to or are from Sub-Saharan Africa.
"Safe sexual behaviour is the key issue here. We now see this is no longer a gay problem, this is a problem across the board. My concerns are that the industry is not doing enough to protect itself across all risk groups," he says.
Morgan is aware that his proposals will raise some issues with insurers about their needs to assess their risk exposure to HIV. Because of this, his paper has put forth some suggestions about product innovation that would provide consumers with an alternative product that would not require HIV testing.
"This is about levelling the field. Anybody wanting a life assurance policy for £150,000, or whatever limit, should be required to test. If they don't want to take the test, there is an alternative product that has an exclusion. It's simple and I am willing to work with insurers on this."
Looking to the future, Morgan admits there will be challenges.
"On certain aspects I feel positive and on others there is still a long way to go. A lot of it depends on the industry's attitude from here on in. I have raised a sensitive issue and one that they didn't want me to raise, but one that I believe my conscience wouldn't have allowed me to ignore.
"I believe if we are going to deal with this issue then we need to get rid of the denial and the stigma and discrimination that has been attached to HIV. This is about getting fairness, not just for the gay community, but across the board."
