I'm an experienced software engineer with strong Python skills, and I was told my experience is well aligned with folks Valon wants to hire.

I completed a full round of interviews: a tech screen (coding) and four full loop rounds (coding/architecture/experience deep dive with the CTO (Sean)/hiring manager interview).

I completed each coding round with a healthy amount of time to spare, went into detail on system architecture in all areas discussed with the interviewer, truthfully described my entire professional career and takeaways from each role with the CTO (Sean), and I had a friendly conversation with the hiring manager about likely fit on three separate teams.

The recruiter emailed me the day after completing my final interview with a rejection – three paragraphs of platitudes but no reason given. On asking for more info, I was told Valon was "unable" to provide any feedback.

I messaged the CTO (Sean), whom I interviewed with, on LinkedIn asking for insight. I received no response.

Like anyone, I've had my share of interviews where I've done badly. This wasn't it. Reflecting on my interviews with Valon, I do not know what I could or should have done differently.

It's absurd that after spending the better part of a working day with Valon, they're refusing to provide even a sentence or two as to why I was rejected. It certainly has me wondering if the decision may have been based on a discriminatory and/or prohibited reason, but of course I don't know because Valon won't tell me.

Valon later asked me to fill out a candidate feedback survey. The irony is palpable. I do not recommend interviewing here.

(Coding) Implement a payments allocation system, including a partial payment suspense account for mortgage payments.