Conversion of existing licences is defined in CAP 804. Because the NPPL requires more solo flying before being issued than does the LAPL, only those pilots who haven't completed 6 hrs PIC since NPPL issue will need to do so before being able to carry passengers as LAPL holders - even though they
could do so as NPPL holders.....
No ATO approval is needed to
convert a licence to a LAPL, but approval
is needed to instruct for initial issue of a LAPL. Thus to teach 67% of a 'proper' PPL course (i.e. the LAPL), a training organisation which has been training pilots for perhaps 50 years will need to pay the ludicrous 'approval fee' to become an ATO, but to carry on teaching a PPL course there is no need to become an ATO until 2015......
The logic of which is only apparent to a blinkered €urocrat...
As has been said many times, EASA is a totally unnecessary organisation, hell-bent on fixing things which simply aren't broken. More and more it is demonstrating that it is manifestly unfit for purpose.
Whopity, have you tried printing out the ridiculous new 'Certificate of Revalidation' panel of the 16-panel 2-sided A4-to-A7 origami which EASA calls a licence? The space for the Examiner's certificate number and signature are each 11 x 8 mm in size. Interestingly, the Examiner doesn't need to include his/her name.....
The CAA allege that pilots won't be allowed to cut up this ridiculous document to fit the normal A6 licence holder - although at the last EASA FCL_PG meeting, I was told that this wasn't true - it's something that the CAA seems to have invented by itself.