Applied as a career changer for a Graduate Mechanical Engineer role and initially felt optimistic about the opportunity. I had taken the time to write a detailed cover letter explaining my background, transferable skills and motivations for applying. I was initially contacted regarding my cover letter and returned a missed call, believing this would be a follow-up discussion around my application, as the voicemail specifically stated it was regarding the cover letter I had sent. The conversation then effectively became an interview/screening call without prior scheduling or indication that I was entering a formal interview process, which left me caught off guard and unprepared. During the call, I was asked questions including my age, my living situation (for example whether I rented or owned my home), and whether I had children. I was also told: “37 is old to be applying for a graduate role, we usually have applicants in their early 20s.” After raising concerns privately, I received a response stating that this formed part of “due diligence” due to my non-traditional background and CV. I had hoped for some acknowledgement of the impact this had on my experience; instead, the response focused on explaining intent and basically the justification for it. I completely understand the need to ask questions regarding experience, career changes or employment history. However, if the intention was to better understand my background, I felt there were more role-relevant ways to discuss this. Finally, graduate roles are not exclusively for younger applicants, particularly for people changing careers or retraining. If expectations around candidate profile or career stage formed part of the hiring process, I feel this could have been communicated more clearly from the outset. I ultimately chose to withdraw my application immediately following the interaction. I would encourage clearer communication around interview processes and a review of interview questioning. Candidates should be assessed on skills, experience and suitability for a role, with conversations focused on relevant experience and role requirements. I hope there is some reflection on the candidate experience and the impact these conversations can have, rather than focusing purely on justification of the process.