Qualified but unlicensed?

Status
Not open for further replies.

pb_lonny

Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2012
Messages
1,025
Location
Tasmania
I am trying to clear up a question I have been asked:

If you have undertaken study and examination in a given area and have an official document to prove this, which you then used to obtain a licence for this area. If in a few years time you do not pay the licence fee and let your licence lapse is it correct to say that you are "qualified but unlicensed"?
 

n5ims

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2004
Messages
3,689
I would say not. If paying the license fee is one of the qualifications and your license is no longer valid due to you failure to do so, you're no longer qualified (you didn't satisfy the fee paid part of your license requirement). Somewhat like a doctor continuing to practice after their licensing board pulled their license for some infraction (perhaps they caused the death of several folks due to their sloppy work, failed to get the required hours of annual training, or even failed to file the required paperwork to their local licensing board). I wouldn't want to have that doctor work on me although his supporters may say he's "qualified but unlicensed".
 

KW4HKY

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
79
Location
Hickory, NC
If you passed your amateur test you paid the FCC fee in advance. It's up to the examiners file with the FCC. I'm not sure what you are asking.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
 

pb_lonny

Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2012
Messages
1,025
Location
Tasmania
My understanding is that people have come back to this after many years away and only provided proof of qualification (The certificate I have) and paid the required fee to renew. I don't believe that any time limit exists for this or any need for resitting any tests.

Lets say you pass your test and pay your fee's each year. After a few years you stop paying the fee and your licence lapses, are you qualified but unlicensed?
 

KW4HKY

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
79
Location
Hickory, NC
If your examiner filed you with the FCC your good for 10 years.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
 

n5ims

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2004
Messages
3,689
My understanding is that people have come back to this after many years away and only provided proof of qualification (The certificate I have) and paid the required fee to renew. I don't believe that any time limit exists for this or any need for resitting any tests.

Lets say you pass your test and pay your fee's each year. After a few years you stop paying the fee and your licence lapses, are you qualified but unlicensed?
In the US (rules in other countries may be different), you have 2 years after your license expired to renew (although you can't legally operate after its expired). If you apply past this 2 year period, your old license is no longer acceptable as proof you've passed the tests and will need to retake the tests like anyone that had never had a license.

A person whose amateur station license grant has expired may apply to the FCC for renewal of the license grant for another term
during a 2 year filing grace period. The application must be received at the address specified above prior to the end of the grace period.
Unless and until the license grant is renewed, no privileges in this part are conferred.
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2006
Messages
317
Location
Out in the Sticks
My understanding is that people have come back to this after many years away and only provided proof of qualification (The certificate I have) and paid the required fee to renew. I don't believe that any time limit exists for this or any need for resitting any tests.

Lets say you pass your test and pay your fee's each year. After a few years you stop paying the fee and your licence lapses, are you qualified but unlicensed?
No. You would have to re-test.
 

KK4TTR

Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
102
Location
Raleigh, North Carolina
This was not so much about the rules per say but more about if it is fair to say "qualified but unlicensed".
Fairness is relative, but I would say the license is what proves you're qualified. Stating you're unlicensed would be a fair and accurate statement given the scenario you're describing.

There's no way to substantiate your qualifications, unless you were to claim that you've studied for, but not yet taken a licensing exam. Or that you let you license lapse. I suppose you could say you've been "previously but not currently licensed", but again, what's the point? If a license is required to perform a given function, and you don't have one, what difference does it make if you're qualified?

You say you're from a country other than the US, and probably English is a second language for you. What is it exactly you want to accomplish?
 

pb_lonny

Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2012
Messages
1,025
Location
Tasmania
You say you're from a country other than the US, and probably English is a second language for you. What is it exactly you want to accomplish?
English is my first / only language :)

Basically on my blog I have this line "I hold an Amateur Operator’s Certificate of Proficiency (Foundation)(AOCP(F)) and have previously held the call sign XXXXXXXXX. I am qualified but unlicensed at the moment."

I just wanted to make sure what I am saying is correct and not going to rub anybody up the wrong way.
 

W8RMH

Feed Provider Since 2012
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
7,976
You are either licensed or you are not. The license is the only qualification.
 

N0IU

Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
800
Location
Wentzville, Missouri
According to the WIA:

Successful candidates are urged to ensure that they do hold a certificate of proficiency, as that is the evidence of qualification to operate an amateur station.
So yes, it appears that you are indeed qualified, but you still can not operate without a license. So what are you waiting for? If you want to get back on the air, go get your license!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top