Part of the CustodyStress archive of observed Bitcoin custody incidents
CS-00992
Documentation absent — hardware wallet (2022)
IndeterminateCase description
Estate professionals in 2022 continued to document cases where the deceased had not included Bitcoin in their will, despite the asset being their largest holding. In one category of such cases, the deceased had deliberately omitted crypto from the will to avoid disclosing its existence to other beneficiaries. After death, the intended recipient—typically a specific family member known to the deceased—was told verbally but had no legal standing and no access credentials. The Bitcoin remained on-chain but legally and technically inaccessible.
Custody context
| Stress condition | Documentation absent |
| Custody system | Hardware wallet (single key) |
| Outcome | Indeterminate |
| Documentation | Unknown |
| Year observed | 2022 |
| Country | International |
Structural dependencies observed
What this illustrates
There was only one way in. When that path was gone, so was access. It's not clear whether anyone ever regained access.
Outcome interpretation
Not enough information is available to determine the outcome.
Source
Publicly Reported
Evidence type
News article
Related cases involving documentation absent
193 cases involve documentation absent
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
Where Bitcoin Custody Intersects Legal and Fiduciary Authority
Where custody creates gaps in estate planning, fiduciary duty, and professional responsibility.
Professional Scope Boundary Matrix
What each professional or product covers, what they do not, and where gaps form between them.
The Independent Assessment Layer in Bitcoin Custody
How independent diagnostic layers emerge when multiple parties depend on shared infrastructure.
Translate