In the second phase of the interviewing process, I was asked to submit an implementation of some spec requests within 24 hours of receiving the spec.

I had to wait 8 days to receive a response by phone.

The interviewer shared some comments she received from the examiner. These comments were unrelated to the spec itself. She complained about why I hadn't implemented in a certain way that was not specified, and why I hadn't added some features that were not relevant to the approach I chose for implementing the spec.

I must add that in a Readme file attached to the solution, I did discuss the option to implement it the way she suggested. I also explained the complexities and drawbacks that led me to choose a different approach for this exercise.

Furthermore, I was told that the examiner commented that it appeared I hadn't used Spring Boot in a long time (without specifying why he thought so).

As I am quite familiar with Spring Boot, this sounded odd. I sent my solution to a friend who works at Intuit and also conducts interviews. He stated he had no idea what the examiner meant. He mentioned that my solution was written using a very high level of Spring Boot and that my implementation was the straightforward approach he would also take if required to complete this exercise.

In summary, the interview felt unprofessional and unkind. I invested about 4 hours in implementing the exercise and expected at least a fair evaluation and a response within a reasonable timeframe.

Write some code for 4 hours, and we will not even bother to check it properly.