Your other less than ideal alternative is to accept the replacement, sell it without taking it out of the box and put the money towards something more suitable or perhaps another brand of scope. Not at all ideal but life is too short.
Someone posted that newer models are technically superior to the older ones which is not the case, not all the time anyway. I have an old 6X18X44 Airmax that is the probably the most clear and sharp of all the Hawkes that I own including two up to date Sidewinders.

In the defence of Hawke one must atleast give them credit for accepting that the scope is faulty and needs replacing.

I have a rather strange hobby of deep space astrophotography. A few years ago I purchased an Apo Astrograph from one of the most respected names in the business through one of the most respected importers. I had to wait 3 months before the scope was built and delivered. On the first test on the stars I noticed a strange diffraction pattern around the very bright stars and spikes that just shouldn't have been there. Nothing drastic but they were there. I sent a photo of the stars and a covering letter to the importer and they said that they had past it on to the manufacturer. After a week or so I recived an email from the Tech Dept and they just told me bluntly that although the spikes and the abnormal differaction pattern exits in my sample this is not what they would call an optical fault and therefore there is no case to answer. A year later and without notice they changed the design of the focuser and the housing of the reducer element. So as you see the law is an arse and not worth the paper it is written on particularly when it comes to highly technical stuff.

A.G