Part of the CustodyStress archive of observed Bitcoin custody incidents
CS-01059
Owner incapacity — hardware wallet (2022)
IndeterminateCase description
Estate planning and digital asset attorneys reported in 2022 that a growing pattern involved Bitcoin holders who became incapacitated—through accident, illness, or cognitive decline—without having established any backup access mechanism. Unlike traditional bank accounts, which allow joint account holders or power of attorney to access funds during incapacity, self-custodied Bitcoin required the holder's active participation or pre-arranged access delegation. Without a previously established recovery plan, families had no legal or technical path to access funds.
Custody context
| Stress condition | Owner incapacity |
| 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 owner incapacity
68 cases involve owner incapacity
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.