I applied via a recruiter (someone who I know in HR) who put me forward. The immediate response was very enthusiastic, with lots of positivity about my CV and phrases like "We really like your profile and think you'd be a great fit for the Customer Support role at Tymit" - which seemed quite full on for opening correspondence, and made me think that they had actually recognised my potential. I then had a really friendly and enthusiastic initial Zoom interview which further made me feel bolstered up and that these people genuinely recognised my potential and that they were very keen to work with me. As I am disabled, this was very important to me, because potential employers frequently block me or make it clear that they think I will be "too hard work" despite the fact that I have an amazing CV and strong references. I was genuinely boosted by the interview and was feeling quite positive about going to the second stage of the interview process, where I would demonstrate how good I was at the practical side of things. Unfortunately, it turned out that they had been stringing me along with false hope. This is something that a lot of employers do to people like me - they bring us in for an initial interview, making it sound like they are super-keen to employ us and that they recognise our potential and are not deterred by the fact that we may need some accommodations. Despite the interview not asking anything that did not expand on what was already in my CV, I then received a suspiciously familar "rejection" email about how other candidates were better qualified and had "stronger backgrounds". Given that Tymit were practically gushing over my experience and CV, saying how amazing it was, and all but telling me to expect to go on to the second stage, receiving an impersonal copy-pasted form email repeating word-for-word what a lot of other "potential employers" say in their rejection emails was frankly offensive. Tymit made direct reference to my CV, but did not ask a single question that expanded on what was already in my CV. They could have rejected me based on my CV, and the email might have made me wonder why they even bothered to interview me - if I had not seen this multiple times before. Many companies like doing this to disabled applicants. They give you an interview that is simply lip service, and then reject you afterwards because "Other people were better." This is incredibly ableist. It particularly upset me because the gushing enthusiasm that I received gave me hope that maybe this time, things would be different. Maybe this once, a company would take a risk. The job was perfectly tailored for someone with my disability - it would have been possible for me to do the work, and excel at it, in a way that many comparable roles and jobs are not accessible. So I felt very boosted by the first interview. Instead, I was rejected in a very ableist, insenstive and unprofessional way - AGAIN. Many companies do this. They give you an interview so they can tick off a box, and claim that they're inclusive cos they patted a "spesh" on the head and let them play interviews with the grown ups. I felt truly infantilised and exploited and incredibly stupid for falling for this for the 20th or 25th time. This was not "giving a fair chance" to a minority. Unfortunately, LOTS of firms do this - it is not an isolated incident, it is ongoing disability discrimination and disability abuse and exploitation - but it is deliberately engineered in such a way that privileged, able-bodied persons will simply go "oh, how nice, you gave that poor little thing an opportunity" and feel like they've been charitable. Furthermore, another micro-aggression - whether deliberate or not - was the inclusion of the wrong feedback link in the rejection email. Again, this happens suspiciously regularly - disabled candidates are given the "wrong" link for feedback or appeals, and it is usually expected that they will be too incapable to fix the issue themselves. As it turns out - I am not incapable, and I found out for myself where the feedback was supposed to be left. This felt like a really cynical and upsetting way to treat a disabled applicant. I would have been a major asset for your company, and I really wish you would have at least maintained the act long enough for me to do the "practical" stage and prove that being disabled doesn't mean unable. At the very least, you might have had the asic human decency to write a proper rejection that pretends that it wasn't because I'm disabled, but after the enthusiastic responses and hyper-positive interview, to send a flat, clichéd copy-and-pasted rejection pretty much made it clear that as soon as Tymit realised I was disabled, they immediately wrote me off.