I interviewed with Monzo twice across two separate recruitment cycles for Data Protection related roles, and unfortunately my overall perception changed significantly between the two experiences. My first recruitment process last year was genuinely positive. I progressed to the final stage, received constructive feedback, and every person involved in the process acted professionally and respectfully. Although I was not ultimately selected, I was encouraged to remain available for future opportunities because my profile was considered suitable for upcoming roles. I was also informed that, given the extensive interview process already completed, it was unlikely I would need to repeat the full process again in the future. That experience left a very strong impression on me. The professionalism, transparency, and feedback culture appeared well aligned with the values Monzo publicly promotes. I accepted the feedback constructively and worked on the areas discussed. This year, when a new relevant role became available, I reapplied expecting at minimum an initial conversation. Instead, I received an application stage rejection without any feedback or discussion. What I found difficult to understand was the inconsistency between reaching the final stage of a highly competitive process one year and not being considered for an initial interview the next, despite prior encouragement to remain available for future opportunities. Recruitment decisions themselves are of course entirely understandable and companies are free to select whichever candidates they consider most suitable. However, candidate experience is also shaped by consistency, transparency, and alignment between what is communicated during one process and what happens in practice later on. It is disappointing because my first experience with Monzo was genuinely one of the better recruitment processes I had participated in. Unfortunately, the second experience materially changed that perception.