LAPL recency confusion

[modelman]

Late last year I renewed my JAR PPL licence after a 2 year lapse, both license and SEP had expired. New Class 2, 2.5 hours with instructor, proficiency check with examiner and I was good to go. Have done 14 hours plus 1 with instructor since. I have now converted to LAPL. I received my LAPL yesterday and reading the recency requirements have confused me a bit. Card with licence says to to able to fly I must in the previous 24 month I need 12hours PIC plus 1 with instructor which I clearly have. What would have happened if I say only had 6 hours since renewing, it would appear to me that I could not fly solo unless under supervision of FI or taken another LPC. IF I then took a LPC I still might have less than 12 in 24 and could not fly!! This confusion has been brought about by the fact that no ratings have been entered on the LAPL and consequently no expiry. Am I to assume that the 24 month is a 'rolling contract, with no expiry date? Is it true to say that if I have less than the 12+1 in 24 on the date of my intended flight, I need to fly under supervision. Seems it would be very easy to go out of recency if you have not flown for a couple of months. BTW
my old PPL SEP still has a year to run but as I had to return this to CAA I guess that won't count. Help!

[xrayalpha]

MM,

It is a rolling validity, so no expiry date.

YOU have to check you have the 12+1 in the past 24 months before each flight.

A pain if you only want to fly the minimums, but really not too hard.

[BillieBob]

You have spotted the fatal flaw in this recency nonsense. If you take the proficiency check option it allows you to 'resume the privileges of the licence' but there is no further validity period. Once you have passed the PC and resumed the privileges, you are back to square one except that you will be able to count the flight that you did as PIC following the proficiency check towards the 24 month total.

Recency never worked for the NPPL and there's no reason to think it will work for the LAPL.

[BEagle]

Recency never worked for the NPPL and there's no reason to think it will work for the LAPL.

Which is the very point several of us have been trying to get through the square-headed minds of EASA for several years now.....:ugh:

[modelman]

Looks like I almost dropped a bollock converting to LAPL, will still work for me with a bit of mental gymnastics but appears not ideal for the very people it was designed for :ugh: