Stolen and recovered?

forgotmyname

Why would the insurance company return the car to you?

The police would have contacted you not your insurer.

Insurance unaffected, but you did declare a claim/loss didnt you?

Mercdriver

AdrianC wrote: »

"Very good condition" (for a car stolen six months before) is not exactly a synonym for "undamaged", is it?

It would need to pass a reasonability test. How do you measure the state of the vehicle immediately before theft to compare between before and after theft e la rental cars?

Ectophile

forgotmyname wrote: »

Why would the insurance company return the car to you?

Because it still belonged to the OP, as the insurance hadn't paid out.

The police would have contacted you not your insurer.

They would naturally assume that a car recovered after 6 months would now belong to the insurance company. They wouldn't have known that the insurance didn't pay.

Insurance unaffected, but you did declare a claim/loss didnt you?

If the OP made a claim (albeit unsuccessful), it's safe to say that the insurance knew it had been stolen.

forgotmyname

The OP would still be the registered keeper/owner so why would the insurer return the vehicle?

Many years ago before keepers were required to update the keepers details my BIL bought a car off me. Months later he crashed it and my parents had a late night call to say they found my car. He didnt send the log book off.

They didnt look to see who it was insured with but who the keeper was.

So was the OP not the keeper? Insurance company shipped the car for free?