CustodyStress
Archive › Owner incapacity
Part of the CustodyStress archive of observed Bitcoin custody incidents
CS-01220

Owner incapacity — hardware wallet (2024)

Indeterminate
Case description
A 2024 case involved a Bitcoin holder who had been in a coma following a traffic accident for three months. The holder had self-custody Bitcoin on a hardware wallet—no exchange involvement. The family held durable power of attorney but the POA document did not specifically reference digital assets or self-custody wallets. The POA was granted to the holder's spouse under RUFADAA, but without the holder's knowledge of PIN or seed phrase location, even valid legal authority was insufficient to access the Bitcoin. The holder eventually recovered consciousness and regained access, but the case illustrated that legal authority alone could not overcome cryptographic barriers in self-custody.
Custody context
Stress conditionOwner incapacity
Custody systemHardware wallet (single key)
OutcomeIndeterminate
DocumentationUnknown
Year observed2024
CountryUnited States
Structural dependencies observed
Single point of failureLegal process required
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
Privately 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
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.