How it works
Non-custodial by construction. The mechanics differ by chain.
A vault the client signs alone, day to day, on every chain WYTYC supports. At succession, nothing moves until the solicitor and WYTYC agree there is cause to act, and even then, neither can act without the other. How that agreement becomes an on-chain action is native to each chain. It is not the same mechanism wearing three different logos.
The three chains
A vault per chain. Three native mechanics.
The client signs alone for everyday use. At succession, the outcome differs by chain: on Bitcoin the funds are swept to the estate for administration; on Ethereum and Solana control of the vault rotates to the heir and nothing moves at all.
Client signs alone. Recovery needs the other two.
IMPLEMENTED NATIVELY, PER CHAIN
Three chains, three outcomes.
Bitcoin - a spend. When death has been verified, a transaction sweeps the vault's funds to the estate account held by the solicitor administering the estate - not to a beneficiary's personal wallet. From there, the assets pass to the beneficiaries through the will and probate, like any other estate asset. This is deliberate: it means inheritance tax, creditors and multiple beneficiaries are all handled through proper estate administration, rather than a raw transfer to an address fixed years earlier. The transaction can only be built with the solicitor's and WYTYC's keys together. The client's key alone was never able to authorise it.
Ethereum - a rotation. Succession here does not move the funds at all. Control of the vault passes to the heir, who then holds and decides what happens to what is inside it. Because this uses a cooling-off period rather than an instant handover, the client has a direct route to cancel a wrongly triggered succession before it completes.
Solana - also a rotation. As with Ethereum, nothing moves. A single instruction removes the original signers and installs the heir as sole controller. The underlying mechanics differ from Ethereum's, but the outcome for the client is the same principle: control passes, and custody was never WYTYC's to give up in the first place.
Verification
Knowing the trigger has actually fired.
Knowing that a death or loss of capacity has genuinely occurred is the hardest question a system like this has to answer. WYTYC's answer is not to trust any single source. Several independent signals feed the decision, and no one of them is ever enough to act on alone.
Activity
An on-chain heartbeat the client can reset at any time. A long silence raises a flag. It never starts anything on its own.
Identification
A corroborating check by the solicitor against independent death records, designed to support rather than to decide. No single source is authoritative, and none can trigger a path alone.
Solicitor
Confirmation from the firm of record, against the death certificate and the Grant of Probate. This is the authoritative human layer.
No single signal is ever sufficient. The architecture requires agreement.