I personally think, and I use the posts on this topic as justification for my opinion (and it is just my opinion), that the CAA IMC rating encourages pilots to think that they can get through wx that they really should have run a mile from five minutes agao. My aviation authority, like many others in europe dont recoginise the IMC rating and as a result, not as many non CAA license holders get into the difficulties that this poster has asked advice on. ........[snip]..... By teaching a 'taster' for IFR which the IMC programme does, it gives a false sence of security and leaves pilots with an IMC thinking that they can cope with what is the most demanding of all flying skills - IFR. Please STOP the IMC qualification I say, but then again, who am I!!
Sorry to be forthright but the above is complete bolloc*s.
The IMC Rating is a superb privilege. It has enabled many many pilots to get utility out of their aircraft, and to fly safely in what is typical UK weather. Many are aircraft owners who fly 100-200 hours/year and are much more current than somebody who did an IR and is now hanging around waiting for an airline job.
In any instrument flight scenario, you are as good as your currency on the type. Plus a lot of IMC Rated pilots find it hard to get into an airplane that's good enough for real IFR, but that's the UK flight training business for you! Should something be banned because some holders will not keep up their currency?
There is no data supporting the assertion that the IMC Rating reduces safety; in fact the very opposite.
Finally, other countries have no option on its lack of recognition, because its IFR privileges are specifically limited to UK only in the ANO.