I have a problem that seems to be chasing its own tail no matter how I turn it around so perhaps someone here is clever than me

Initially what we experienced was this:
A test carried out by an agent fails with an RMA connection error as reply and status changes to Bad (please forget about *why* connection errors happen for now).
If this happens three times in a row the alert profiles Bad-actions are triggered and we're alerted that a test has status Bad due to connectivity errors with the agent. Often the connection with the agent will be okay one or two minutes later, the test changes status to OK and the alert profiles Good-actions are triggered.
To avoid having these "false" alarms send I ticked 'Use "Warning" status if:' and entered '('RMA:' in '%SuggestedReply%')' as condition. I also unticked 'Treat Warning status as Bad' to avoid having the "false" alarms send.
This does the job and we receive no more "false" alarms telling about RMA connection errors - as long as the test has status OK.
Trouble is that this setup does exactly the opposite if a test has status Bad, e.g. a drive with 10 GB free and a threshold on the test saying 20 GB.
In this case the test already has status Bad when the RMA connection errors occur, test changes status to Warning as supposed - but as I described Warning is *not* treated as Bad meaning that the test now changes status from Bad to Warning and once the connection errors are gone and the test changes status back to Bad the alert profiles Bad-actions are triggered once again.
Now, there is no doubt that everything within HM does exactly what it should do with the setup mentioned above.
However as this does not solve my problem I've been trying to find a way to tell HM to simply keep the test's current state in case of an RMA connection failure - so far without any luck.
What I actually need is functionality similar to a checkbox under 'Optional status processing' labeled 'Keep current status if' where I could put the string '('RMA:' in '%SuggestedReply%')' as condition - but this checkbox doesn't exist

Perhaps the answer to problem is quite obvious (I hope !) and can actually be achieved through some regular expressions somewhere that I just can't seem to find the logic in - can you give me an advise ?
Thanks in advance !
/Kasper