High Street / Manufacturers Warranty Question

Thanks to all who have commented. Your insights have all been very helpful. For all who are interested, here's a followup of what has happened until now. Maybe you'll find some things helpful as well.
Firstly, in fact and by law there is no issue of time passed here. By law it's as fully covered now as it was on day one after purchase.
A senior store manager consulted the retailer's litigation department, which purportedly believes they are operating within the relevant laws and not doing anything wrong (however misleading their store policy might be by them not having clarified at the time of purchase that if something goes wrong with the product 3 months after purchase the customer will at best get a refurbished item and not a new one, with the further inconvenience of delivery at an unguaranteed time). Further, the manager discussed the issue with the manufacturer and the manufacturer indicated that they do not offer repairs on that model of printer because it's not cost-efficient for them to do so (presumably, and in contrast, if they actually are offering refurbished models then they do actually repair them - it's just that they later pass them on to others as replacements; but they wont repair and return to the original owner his or her fixed printer).
But according to Trading Standards a consumer printer store purchase contract as in this case is indeed between the customer and the store ONLY; and, any warranty arrangment as in this case is between the retailer and the manufacturer. The customer has the full right to have the situation resolved by the store at which the purchase was made, and if store personnel insist that the customer deal only with the manufacturer in resolving the issue, then that could amount to restriction of the statutory consumer rights which in turn could very well amount to a CRIMINAL offense in itself.
Further, we have been advised, and it is worth adding, that the well known Sales of Goods Act 1979 has been supplemented to the further benefit of consumers by the Sale & Supplyof Goods To Consumer Regulations 2002.
Additionally, with regard to a refurbished replacement, there are a few issues here:
a. It may be just as good but it may turn out not to be.
b. When an item was purchased new and sealed in its original packaging, the retailer's obligation to replace a faulty product with an equivalent item is not satisfied by replacing it with a refurbished item. In common dictionary and legal definitions, new and refurbished are two different things. If the customer wants to accept a refurbished one, he or she are free to do so but the store cannot mandate this as a satisfactory resolution.
c. The customer has legal title to the specific printer he purchased, which is one reason serial numbers are printed on them. He cannot be forced to exchange it for something else, which is - or used to be - the used property of another. If he or she is willing to accept an exchange, that's fine. But equally if customer wants their own property to be repaired or refunded or replaced by a new eqivalent then that is their total right.
The customer did not buy a liscense to use a particular model of a manufacturer's product line for warranteed period of time; rather, the customer procured a specific item, marked by a unique serial number, with which he will have become familiar in the course of use. THAT is the item sold to him by the retailer, and the retailer in the end has the legal obligation to repair or refund the customer's particular item, if not to exchange it for an equivalent. Any calculations by the retailer or manufacturer as to the equivalence of a refurbished replacement is only relevant if acceptable by the customer.
On the face of it, if refurbished products were from all perspectives truly equivalent to 'brand new' items, then many customers would prefer to buy refurbished items at a reduced cost from the outset, especially if it is the case and if they knew at the outset that any replacement for faulty items would be by way of refurbished items.
This situation has been referred to Trading Standards, as further referred to an enforcement officer.