Im pretty sure the intent of the reasonable time is to make retailers take responsibility for issues, and not to pass the buck back to the manufacture.
In an ideal world the retailer should put there hand up, grab whatever satisfies the client off the shelf, hand it over and then deal with their supplier behind the scenes (stress the ideal world … without clients who smash things up and expect them to last forever … which isn’t the case here). It is the RETAILERS decision to replace or repair, not the supplier.
That is after all why there is the option to replace with a similar product within the act, and what the retailer should be calculating a % of their mark up on (failure rates).
Having been on both ends of the situation many times I can certainly understand the frustration of a client, who has spent considerable amounts of their hard earned money only to be let down by poor quality and venting it at those that are there to take responsibility (the retailer).
And I’d me MASSIVELY disappointed if any retailer took it upon themselves to ignore their legal responsibilities by binning the complaint … which surely is not only going to make the situation worse for them, but also reflect negatively on the manufacture / product off which they earn their living.