A streamlined system to simplify the way passenger claims for flight delay compensation are handled is being demanded by Jet2.

The call is made in the airline’s response to the government’s Aviation 2050 strategy consultation.

It follows previous criticism by the carrier of the current alternative dispute resolution (ADR) schemes.

Executive chairman Philip Meeson claimed ADRs need to be reformed because they are “unfit for purpose”.

Jet2 is advocating a flight-by-flight, rather than passenger-by-passenger, designation for eligibility.

Under current rules, each passenger must submit a separate claim to an ADR provider, which is then considered independently of any other claimant from the same flight.

The “disjointed” approach can result in passengers on the same flight receiving conflicting decisions to their compensation claims.

Proposals have been put forward to make it mandatory for airlines to sign up to one of two ADR providers approved by the Civil Aviation Authority.

But Jet2 claimed: “With the two providers’ staff sometimes overwhelmed by the number of individual claims submitted, they are, we believe, often unable dedicate the time required to properly adjudicate.”

The airline wants to see a review process for airlines introduced, addressing a claimed imbalance in the system and ensuring the decision-making process on a complex area of EU law is continuously improved.

The review process would not impact payouts to passengers but would consider whether, in principle, disputed ADR rulings are correct as a matter of precedent for the future.

Meeson said: “Ensuring our customers have a great holiday when travelling with us is our main priority. This extends to our response when, occasionally, there’s an unavoidable delay.

“If a flight is delayed and it’s our fault, we pay out quickly and without fuss. But it makes no sense for adjudicators to tell us that we should pay out for some passengers on board, but not others.

“We have, for some time, supported the introduction of a new system where decisions are made on a flight by flight basis, which will benefit both customers and airlines, ensuring quick and fair decisions are made by qualified individuals.”

He added: “The current ADR system is unfit for purpose and needs reform.

“We want to work with government to introduce a scheme that ensures consistency and fairness for passengers and airlines alike.

“Unreformed, the negative consequences of compulsory ADR would be severe.”