Taken at the Flood by Agatha Christie

A few weeks after marrying an attractive young widow, Gordon Cloade is tragically killed by a bomb blast in the London blitz. Overnight, the former Mrs. Underhay finds herself in sole possession of the Cloade family fortune. Shortly afterwards, Hercule Poirot receives a visit from the dead man's sister-in-law who claims she has been warned by 'spirits' that Mrs. Underhay's first husband is still alive. Poirot has his suspicions when he is asked to find a missing person guided only by the spirit world. Yet what mystifies Poirot most is the woman's true motive for approaching him...

Christie's bad guys brag
they can't resist showing off
I did it, here's why!

I enjoyed everything about the story progression, except for the last chapter. It would have great if chapter 16 had been the true ending

Fascinating–not least because of all the other reviews, haha.

I personally enjoy it when Christie does a mystery from multiple POVs (as opposed to just following Poirot). It was interesting following the Cloade family, and honestly, the narrative felt more like a meditation on British society right after WW2; there are a lot of angles on how times have changed, etc.

The mystery itself was intricate. I was able to catch a few of the key clues, but I didn't put it all together until Poirot talked it out at the end.

Speaking of, the end is, indeed, strange. Even a few chapters before the end, I thought Poirot was being just annoyingly vague (which actually is not a frustration I usually have with him!). But then the epilogue is surprising, as others noted. It definitely doesn't read well today. I can almost-sort of imagine why Christie did it, in the context of a post-war novel about safety . . . But also I wonder if she was just shoe-horning in the “romantic” ending? XD

Either way, the puzzle is still a worthy one!