After the initial screening call I did a technical task, which took me a few hours. I received an invitation to the next stage, which was a technical interview. The interview was tough, but good in that they asked great questions and gave decent feedback, but I noticed that some of the questions I asked about how they did things did not seem to be appreciated. However they told me that I did not match some of the requirements in the original screening, and while they claimed this wasn't a dealbreaker I figured they would not tell me this if it wasn't an issue. I strongly believe this dealbreaker should have been brought up in the screening interview or via email before I wasted 3-4 hours on a technical task. With this in mind I assumed that I would not get this role, but I was disappointed to never hear back from Moneybox about the outcome, considering the time I had invested in this process.

Spoke to a recruiter and was immediately tasked with a take home task to hit up their mock API and build a mini version of moneybox. The recruiter told me the test would only take a couple hours which was frankly a full blown lie. Any well designed app would have at least a full day if not more. The mock API I was using was broken due to an account limit which means I couldn't test my full scenario. I was unable to test my code due to the broken API so guessed which ID I should use because it wasn't mentioned in the spec. I was then given a grand total of 4 lines of feedback, despite spending over 8 hours working on this test. Frankly I think it's insulting.