CustodyStress
Archive › Owner death
Part of the CustodyStress archive of observed Bitcoin custody incidents
CS-01344

Owner death — hardware wallet (2025)

Constrained
Case description
A 2025 Canadian estate case involved a holder who had created a custom mnemonic scheme—rather than a standard BIP39 seed phrase, they had used a self-invented word list that mapped numbers to words from a personal dictionary. The hardware wallet they had used accepted the custom word list at setup because it had not verified the words against the BIP39 standard. When the family attempted recovery using a standard hardware wallet, it rejected all words from the custom list. A wallet recovery specialist eventually identified that the wallet itself was physically intact; the PIN was documented, and no seed phrase restoration was actually required. The specialist was able to sign transactions directly from the device without ever resolving the non-standard seed phrase issue.
Custody context
Stress conditionOwner death
Custody systemHardware wallet (single key)
OutcomeConstrained
DocumentationUnknown
Year observed2025
CountryCanada
Structural dependencies observed
Single point of failure
What this illustrates
There was only one way in. When that path was gone, so was access. Whether full access was ultimately possible is unclear, but significant delay or outside intervention was involved.
Outcome interpretation
Access remained possible, but only with delay, dependence, or significant difficulty.
Source
Privately Reported
Evidence type
News article
Related cases involving owner death
119 cases involve owner death 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