Do New C Cards Have a Disclaimer?

[Ben_3]

I havent seen or heard of this on a regular PADI certification card. The exception being a new card after completing the reactivate programme witch then states the reactivation date on it.

 

[JackD342]

I havent seen or heard of this on a regular PADI certification card. The exception being a new card after completing the reactivate programme witch then states the reactivation date on it.

That’s a good thought, there might be some basis in that Facebook rumor as a misunderstanding of the new Reactivate card for non-PADi divers. I don’t have the wording to pass along, but the PADI Reactivate process will be issuing cards for non-PADI divers who use the program. They will NOT be certification cards, and will state that plainly. So they will also require separate proof of initial certification.

 

[pauldw]

So, that’s what the guy eventually posted. And said he’s sure the stricter language is coming, to ward off governmental intervention. I’m not sure I’ve even heard of PDIC.

 

[JackD342]

Quite a difference between "expected" and "valid only if..."
I read that line as a reminder to the diver, and not as a qualifier or a restriction on the certification.

 

[Scott]

View attachment 555820

So, that’s what the guy eventually posted. And said he’s sure the stricter language is coming, to ward off governmental intervention. I’m not sure I’ve even heard of PDIC.

It's not the first time the individual has posted about governmental intervention and it's usually accompanied with the concern of the VA closing pools. Nothing to see here.

 

[TMHeimer]

Quite a difference between "expected" and "valid only if..."
I read that line as a reminder to the diver, and not as a qualifier or a restriction on the certification.

That's what I was going to say. Like "recommended" depth of 60 feet.

 

[84CJ7]

If its true its a perfectly logical thing for any agency to do as a technical CYA measure (though I'm not sure why it would be necessary) and then not put one ounce of effort into enforcing.

It basically says that the card holder is certified to dive now (assuming the instructor isn't a total doorknob just pushing people through) but that the certifying agency makes no guarantee that the person will be ready to dive in the future and makes it someone else's problem to make that determination.
Unless of course they pay for the refresher course in which case the agency can, (again with quality instruction) reliably say at that moment that this person is verified as still being capable of diving and the clock starts over again.

 

[Nemrod]

View attachment 555820

I’m not sure I’ve even heard of PDIC.

My Nitrox is PDIC.

None of these ABC agencies have any real authority over anything or for anything. There is no Federal Diving Administration that issues ratings at the authority of the administrator and which are backed up by the CFRs (Code of Federal Regulations). All of these SCUBA cards are "industry" accepted and with just a quick trot through the Accident and Incident Forum one can quickly see why some might want CYA language to remind a diver that experience is required on an annual or frequent basis before executing dives. Pilots have to pass flight reviews, you want the government involved, you might get more than you asked for.

What if you had to have a current dive medical annually that stated you were fit and healthy with no conditions that could cause an issue? Maybe all persons over 45 pass a full stress test annually?

N

 

[Mike1967]

What if you had to have a current dive medical annually that stated you were fit and healthy with no conditions that could cause an issue? Maybe all persons over 45 pass a full stress test annually?

No thanks.

 

[TMHeimer]

No thanks.

Double no thanks.