I found something similar with one of my images a few years ago. I sent the company a very polite email saying "thank you for licensing my work for use, please give me the details of the license purchased for my records".
I got an extended license sale from IS a couple of days later and a letter in the post saying they licensed it from there.

Not saying this was the best way to handle it, but it's what I did. It was a bit easier for me because it was a printed product, clearly selling in excess of what a standard license would allow.

my opinion, that it isn't right - first - to use, and only after - to pay for license.
Same time i think, that in my case extended license is not enough.

Maybe check if your work hasn't been copied or stolen by another contributor on different websites, he could have sold it to this company as his own work.

no, nothing like this. I checked

Hello!
I found, that my photo was used by one of major smartphone producer (think they sold about 300mio) as standart wallpaper (they deliver new phones with photo inside).
This phone never was sold with extended or premier license at shutterstock.
What do you think? Is there reason to try get smth from this producer?