FFF - Suggest you read LASORS again. What it actually says is:
A co-pilot acting as pilot-in-command
under the supervision of the
pilot-in-command on an aeroplane on
which more than one pilot is required
under the type certification of the
aeroplane or as required by JAR-OPS
provided such pilot-in-command time
under supervision (see ‘5’ below) is
countersigned by the pilot-in-command
Therefore PICUS may be claimed in an aircraft certified for single pilot but operated as 2 pilot under JAR-OPS (Citation I springs to mind).
Where did the idea come from that this hypothetical pilot does not hold a type-rating on the aircraft concerned? I see no reference to that in the original question.
Perhaps the confusion arose because Dirrick mistakenly wrote single-engine when he really meant single-pilot, thereby prompting Beagle's initial sarcasm. But then, of course, it's our God-given right to pour scorn on those who's grasp of written English is inferior to our own isn't it?
Answers to that last rhetorical question accepted only if written in perfect colloquial Flemish.
Happy Christmas