CustodyStress
Archive › Vendor lockout
Part of the CustodyStress archive of observed Bitcoin custody incidents
CS-01285

A creditor who deposited 1 BTC in October 2022—when Bitcoin was worth approximately

Constrained
Case description
Many FTX creditors who expected to receive 119% of their November 2022 claim values in cash described a practical access problem: their claim was denominated in dollars at the 2022 petition date, but they had originally deposited Bitcoin. A creditor who deposited 1 BTC in October 2022—when Bitcoin was worth approximately $19,000—would receive a claim payment of approximately $22,600 (119% of $19,000) in cash. But Bitcoin in November 2024 was trading above $90,000. These creditors had effectively lost 75% of their Bitcoin's current value through the mandatory cash conversion at petition-date pricing, creating what many described as a second-order loss from the custody dependency.
Custody context
Stress conditionVendor lockout
Custody systemExchange custody
OutcomeConstrained
DocumentationUnknown
Year observed2024
CountryUnited States
Structural dependencies observed
Institutional cooperation required
What this illustrates
Getting access back required help from an institution — and that help wasn't available. 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
Publicly Reported
Evidence type
News article
Related cases involving vendor lockout
170 cases involve vendor lockout 512 cases involve exchange custody 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.