CustodyStress
Archive › Device loss
Part of the CustodyStress archive of observed Bitcoin custody incidents
CS-01287

Device discarded — hardware wallet (2024)

Blocked
Case description
On 3 December 2024, the Cardiff Civil and Family Justice Centre heard James Howells's claim against Newport City Council over the right to excavate the Docksway landfill where his hard drive containing the private keys to 8,000 Bitcoin had been accidentally discarded in 2013. Bitcoin's price had passed $100,000, making the hard drive worth approximately $800 million. Howells and his legal team proposed a $13 million excavation plan using AI-powered drones, X-ray scanning equipment, and robotic sorting to locate the drive with minimal environmental disturbance. Newport City Council resisted, arguing the case had no merit and describing Howells's offer to share Bitcoin proceeds as an unlawful attempt to induce the council to act outside its environmental permit.
Custody context
Stress conditionDevice loss
Custody systemHardware wallet (single key)
OutcomeBlocked
DocumentationUnknown
Year observed2024
CountryUnited Kingdom
Structural dependencies observed
Legal process required
What this illustrates
Before anyone could access the funds, a legal process had to be completed first. Access was not recoverable.
Outcome interpretation
Access was not possible under the reported conditions.
Source
Publicly Reported
Evidence type
News article
Related cases involving device loss
188 cases involve device loss 274 cases involve hardware wallet (single key) View archive statistics →
This archive documents observed custody survivability failures. It does not attempt to document all Bitcoin losses or security incidents. Submit a case
← All cases
Framework references
Terms guide
Survives
Access remained possible under the reported conditions.
Constrained
Access remained possible, but only with delay, dependence, or significant difficulty.
Blocked
Access was not possible under the reported conditions.
Indeterminate
There was not enough information to determine the outcome.
Single-person knowledge
Recovery depended on information or capability held by one individual who was unavailable.
Institutional dependence
Recovery depended on a third-party institution or service that was inaccessible or uncooperative.
Documentation gap
Recovery depended on instructions that were missing, incomplete, or unclear.
Authority mismatch
The person with legal authority to act did not have operational access, or vice versa.
Original text
Rate this translation
Your feedback will be used to help improve Google Translate