A321 Captain reported refusing the aircraft due to unaddressed #2 Engine Over Temperature.

Narrative

On Day 65; I refused Aircraft X due to repeated Engine #2 EGT over temperature on takeoff; with no repair action taken. I flew a flight with Aircraft X; from ZZZ1 to ZZZ and had an EGT over temp on take-off (TOGA power; 22 degrees celsius outside temp; Runway XX). The over temp caution appeared on the ECAM immediately at liftoff; with an Engine #2 EGT showing 954 degrees celsius. That message is inhibited until airborne; so I presume it was occurring much earlier during the takeoff roll. The First Officer was Pilot Flying (PF). ECAM directed reduction of power until within limits. In accordance with the departure procedure from ZZZ1; and in accordance with engine failure procedures; at 1000 feet AGL he reduced power and the ECAM caution message subsequently disappeared. The EGT remained within limits at the climb detent for the remainder of the flight. When en-route; I tried to call Dispatch using my iPad and do a phone patch to Maintenance; but the aircraft WiFi was intermittent and the call could not be completed. I sent an ACARS message to dispatch to advise them of the discrepancy and recommended they find us a new aircraft for the next segment of our trip. We continued to ZZZ where there was significant thunderstorm activity; and we discussed how a go-around might give us the same caution; so a soft go-around would be preferred. We landed uneventfully and I entered the engine discrepancy and the WiFi discrepancy in the AML. Upon further review of the AML; I discovered the over temp had occurred 7 times in the preceding 45 days; with substantially the same balancing entry from maintenance stating the over temp condition is caused by engine deterioration; and no further troubleshooting is necessary.For Aircraft X; this engine over temp condition has occurred on Day 65; Day 64; Day 48; Day 37; and Day 33 and Day 0 (twice); I didn't look back any further than that for the engine history. We were scheduled to take the same aircraft to ZZZ2; so I advised the Gate Agent and Dispatch that we would probably need another aircraft to avoid a significant delay. The Aircraft Maintenance Technician (AMT) arrived at the aircraft about 30 minutes after we landed; and stated he was going to hold boarding while they evaluated the engine. He returned about 30 minutes later and stated they were going to do a visual inspection of the inlet and exhaust for obvious damage and return the aircraft to service; then made the remark 'Run that [expletive] to the red line.' I stated; 'not me' and that I would like to see a more extensive inspection or repair action; such as borescope or additional troubleshooting. The AMT stated he was not going to do that; and I would have to refuse the aircraft. I made the following entry in the AML 'AIRCRAFT REFUSED DUE TO REPEATED ENG 2 EGT OVER TEMP ON TAKEOFF; NO REPAIR ACTION TAKEN.' After a 3-1/2 hour delay; we were given another aircraft for flight the from ZZZ to ZZZ2. ZZZ was in IROPS for thunderstorms in the vicinity. It's noteworthy that ATIS indicated 39 degrees OAT and 'LLWS advisories in affect' the entire time; and a TOGA power takeoff was performed. It was my judgement that the aircraft condition would limit thrust when I needed it most; so I refused the aircraft. Inadequate Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) technical procedures for deteriorating engines; and no AMT interest in troubleshooting above the minimum standards authorized by the AMM. Monitoring (instead of fixing) a deteriorating engine that gives caution/warning messages repeatedly on take-off is unsafe. At minimum; it is a significant distraction to the pilots. At least attempt to troubleshoot or fix it.