pitch wrote:
Once again the majority are practicing contrived stupidity!
The OP was let down by Good Sam. Repair has nothing to do with the post.
Progressive was able to find a responder and have him on site before Good Sam did anything that was in the least helpful to the OP.
I did not find that picking the thrust of the OP's post was at all difficult. Perhaps some of you may want to bone up on your critical reading comprehension skills.
As an aside what the service provider did was not a repair, OP was disabled and a safety hazard on the road. The provider provided a temporary emergency patch so that the OP could safely move to an area where a proper repair could be effected.
I don't know where the burden of "contrived stupidity" lies but a few things in the original post stood out: the owner of the MH was wrangling on the phone with the GS representative about repair vs. "assist". The GS agent told him that a repair might be needed by what was told to GS. It may be that GS was trying to find a service person that could facilitate a repair rather than a tow. GS may have dedicated repair people in that area or people that offer both services, repair and towing. We are not privy to the administration of the situation. Nor do we know the logistical attributes between Progressive and Good Sam. It may be that Progressive has someone closer to the OP's location than GS. IMO, no judgement can be made as to the effectiveness of either provider based on the accounts related.
"Assist", "temporary emergency patch", "a hand", a "quick look" or any other labeling of what took place still involves some type of involvement by whoever is called and, by the terms of the service contract, is defined as a repair.
