The first application for the digital nomad permit ended in a refusal: the authority said it doubted the veracity of some of the information, without naming a single document. A month later we filed again — and waited 73 days for a decision against a statutory deadline of 20 working days.
- 73 days
- from the second filing to the decision
- filed 12 July, approved on 23 September 2026
- 34 days
- between the refusal and the new filing
- refused on 8 June, filed again on 12 July with a rebuilt file
- 1 document
- the only weak point in the file
- an apostille whose QR code would not open from Spain
- 126 days
- from the first filing to approval
- 20 May to 23 September, including the refusal and the second filing
What they came with
A software developer employed by a foreign company applied for the digital nomad permit while in Spain on a Schengen visa. The first application went in on 20 May. On 8 June the refusal arrived: UGE stated that it had doubts about the veracity of some of the information submitted, or about whether it matched the data held in official registers. Which document, fact or circumstance raised the question was not stated. The Schengen visa expired on 15 July, so the time available was set by the calendar as much as by the procedure.
How the timeline ran
-
01
A refusal with no stated reason
8 June. The decision came with a general formula about doubts over the veracity of the information. Not one document was named. That is the real difficulty with this kind of refusal: you do not know what to fix, and a new filing may repeat the same mistake.
-
02
Reading the file as the case officer would
June. We went through the whole package with one question: what here will the case officer be unable to verify. We found a single weak point — the apostille on the company register extract. It carried a QR code, but the site behind that code would not open from Spain without a VPN.
-
03
Appeal or file again
June. An appeal would have required obtaining the documents again anyway, and it takes up to ten months to be heard. The applicant’s Schengen visa was running out. We chose to file again while he was still lawfully in Spain.
-
04
Rebuilding the file
June to early July. A new register extract with a verifiable apostille, fresh certificates and up-to-date bank statements. We checked every QR code and link ourselves, from Spain and without a VPN — the way the case officer will open them.
-
05
The second filing
12 July. Filed again, with a covering letter. The twelfth fell on a Sunday, so the clock started on the next working day. From the moment of filing, the application itself is what keeps the stay in Spain lawful.
-
06
The deadline passed
10 August. The twentieth working day. No decision. By law, from that day the permit counts as granted.
-
07
Requesting the certificate
10 August. The same day we filed a request for confirmation of the approval by default. The right already exists, but there is no document to show when booking the appointment for the residence card.
-
08
Silence
August to mid-September. Neither a decision nor a certificate of silence. We kept the applicant informed, including on the weeks when there was nothing to report.
-
09
The approval
23 September. The decision arrived, positive. 73 days after filing, 44 days after the statutory deadline had passed.
What did not go to plan
What actually delayed or complicated the process, and what we did about it.
The refusal named no document
The law requires decisions to be reasoned. In practice the wording can be so general that there is nothing to correct. You have to find the cause yourself, by reading the file the way the case officer reads it.
The apostille QR code would not open from Spain
The document was genuine, but the usual way of confirming it — scan the code, see the entry in the register — did not work from Spain. To the authority that is information which cannot be confirmed against an official source: precisely what the refusal described. The refusal came three months before the tightening of document and apostille checks at UGE was publicly discussed. Since then we check the code on every apostille ourselves, before filing.
An appeal takes longer than the Schengen visa lasts
An appeal looked well founded, but it takes up to ten months and needs the same set of documents. Filing again gave both a lawful stay while the case was pending and a shorter route to a decision.
The permit is granted, the paper is not
After the twentieth working day the permit counts as granted by law. But you cannot book the residence card appointment with that knowledge alone: you need a document, and it has to be requested separately and waited for.
Tell us your situation — we reply within the hour
What the costs were made of
| Item | Amount | Paid to |
|---|---|---|
| Our support | per the contract | to us; fixed before the work starts |
| Government fee for the application | €73.26 | to the state; paid before filing |
| Residence card fee | €16.08 | to the state; after approval, before fingerprints |
| Register extract with apostille | at cost | to third parties; obtained twice, the second time after the refusal |
| Sworn translations | at the translator’s rate | to a third party |
Government fees and third-party services cost the same whoever runs your case. Filing again meant paying the fee again and obtaining the documents again: a refusal costs more than it looks.
What we did
- Went through the refusal and the whole submitted file to find the likely cause
- Checked the QR codes and links on every apostille from Spain, not from the issuing country
- Weighed the two routes — appeal and new filing — by time and by risk
- Rebuilt the file: new extract, fresh certificates, current bank statements
- Drafted the covering letter to UGE
- Filed the application and gave the applicant the receipt as proof that his stay was lawful
- Tracked the twentieth working day and requested confirmation of the approval by default
- Stayed in contact throughout the wait, including when there was no news
What the service did not cover
The applicant obtained the documents in his country of citizenship himself, through acquaintances and agents — including the register extract with the apostille that, in our reading, caused the problem. We do not order documents abroad and we do not answer for the work of intermediaries, but we check everything that arrives before filing. After this refusal, checking QR codes and links became a mandatory step for us.
The authority never named the reason for the refusal, and our explanation about the apostille is a conclusion drawn from the file, not an answer from UGE. We cannot speed up the review: the timing in this case did not depend on us. Administrative silence gives you the right but not the paper, and how long the document takes is not known in advance. We promise our work and honest timelines, not the decision of a state body.
Questions we had to answer
Can I apply again after a refusal on the digital nomad permit?
Yes. A refusal does not bar a new application on the same ground. But filing again only makes sense after you have worked out the cause: if it has not been found and fixed, the second refusal will arrive for the same reason.
What do I do if the refusal gives no reason?
Go through the file yourself, document by document, asking what the authority cannot verify here or what conflicts with the registers. Decisions are required by law to be reasoned, and weak reasoning is an argument on appeal. But an appeal takes up to ten months, and filing again is sometimes faster.
Why check the QR code on an apostille?
That code is how the case officer confirms the apostille in the register of the issuing country. If it does not open, or leads somewhere other than the official site, the document is not confirmed. Check it from Spain and without a VPN: that is how the officer will open it.
What is silencio positivo and when does it apply?
If UGE issues no decision within twenty working days of electronic filing, the permit is deemed granted. This rule belongs to the Ley 14/2013 regime, where silence works in the applicant’s favour — unlike the general immigration regime, where silence is usually read against you. The right arises the day after the deadline passes.
If silence means approval, why the further wait?
The right arises by itself; the document does not. To book the residence card appointment you need paper: either the decision or a certificate that the silence occurred. The certificate is requested separately, and the deadline for issuing it is not kept in practice. In this case 44 days passed between the deadline and the decision.
Is it lawful to stay in Spain while the case is pending?
Yes. The law states plainly that filing the application extends the lawfulness of your stay until the case is decided. The filing receipt is the document worth carrying.
Sources
The laws and official documents we relied on. Links go to the primary sources, so you can check them yourself.
- Ley 14/2013, de 27 de septiembre, de apoyo a los emprendedores y su internacionalización Article 76.1: the decision period is twenty days from electronic filing; if no decision is issued, the permit is deemed granted by administrative silence. The same article: decisions must be reasoned, and filing extends the applicant’s lawful stay until the case is decided.
- Ley 39/2015, de 1 de octubre, del Procedimiento Administrativo Común de las Administraciones Públicas Article 24.4: the certificate of silence is issued within fifteen days of the request. Article 30.2: a period stated in days means working days. Articles 121–122: appeal by recurso de alzada.
Recognise your situation?
Other cases
Ask a question
Describe your situation — we will reply within the hour