Why a visible wallet balance does not prove access or ownership

A screenshot of a balance, a block-explorer page, or a QR code someone found can look like proof. It is not. Confusing these levels can lead to wrong valuations, expectations and decisions based on assets that may not be reachable.

The three levels

1. Indication, a wallet app on a device, an exchange email, a paper note, a screenshot. This tells you something existed or may exist. It is not sufficient proof of the present.
2. Verified digital / on-chain record, it has been established that a specific address or account exists and holds a specific balance on the blockchain or the exchange’s books. This confirms existence and current balance only; linking that address or account to the person who passed away is a separate evidence step.
3. Legal position and authority, who has a claim to the assets under the applicable law and who is authorised to act on behalf of the estate for the action concerned. These are separate questions and do not have to be answered by the same person. This is determined by the estate rules of the jurisdiction, not by possession of a device or a screenshot.

What a public address is

Every wallet has one or more public addresses. On transparent blockchains such as Bitcoin and Ethereum, addresses and much on-chain activity are publicly visible; that is not true of every network, privacy-focused protocols can hide addresses, amounts or transaction data in whole or in part. That is like a bank account number: the number and the balance say nothing about who may use the account or to whom the money legally belongs.

Watch-only wallets

A watch-only wallet is a view of one or more addresses without the corresponding private keys. It can follow addresses, transactions and balances, but it does not contain the private keys needed to spend the crypto independently. Whoever finds such a wallet therefore has no access, only a picture. It is an indication, not access.

What a balance still does not show

• Access. A balance can be visible while the required access is missing, for example because of a forgotten password, a locked device or missing necessary recovery material.
• Ownership. An address can receive funds the person who passed away did not own or had lent; an exchange account can be shared or mislabelled. Addresses are not linked to persons.
• Reachability. Loss of access, transfer restrictions or illiquidity may be relevant to valuation in some jurisdictions, but they do not automatically reduce the legal or taxable value; check the applicable rules locally.
• Time. A screenshot is a point in time; the balance may have changed, and its source is unverifiable.
• Completeness. A visible address may be one of many; the balance shown is not necessarily the whole picture.

Access, possession, ownership and title

Four terms that are often confused:

• Access, you can technically use the crypto (keys, password, device).
• Possession, you hold the device or material; that is not the same as access and not the same as ownership.
• Ownership, the legal question of who is entitled to the crypto: answered by the applicable law, not by a visible balance.
• Legal title, the legal basis on which someone makes a claim, for example inheritance law.

An heir can be the legal beneficiary without technical access. Conversely, someone can have technical access without being the beneficiary themselves. Whether that person may use the access depends on their authority to act on behalf of the estate or the beneficiaries for the action concerned.

What to do instead

• Record the balance and its source/date in the estate inventory as an indication.
• Never value the estate from a screenshot.
• Establish authority first (see legal authority vs technical access), then confirm the wallet through the correct route, then value.

Anyone who offers to “release” a balance you merely saw (for a fee) is the situation described in scams targeting crypto estates.