. Ami was looking to buy an investment property from interstate. She contacted a buyer's advocate in Victoria and gave them her specifications. The advocate found several houses for her to look at online and then took her to virtual open homes to see the properties. Ami was very interested in one. She asked the advocate a number of further questions including whether there were any crimes committed in the house as she had heard about former drug properties causing havoc for new owners and requiring extensive internal refurbishment. Ami informed the advocate that she was still living in the Northern Territory and could not get 'local intel' about the neighbourhood. The advocate stated that the home was perfect with no criminal history attached. In fact, the advocate had not bothered to stay up to date with readily available information to real estate professionals and artier settlement the tenant who moved in complained of odours and stains on the walls. It was discovered the house had been used as an illegal drug lab and this information was available to the advocate. Ami incurred significant expenses allowing the tenant to break the lease and having to pay for extensive internal rectifications (new carpets, walls, ceilings).

Advise Ami of her rights against: (hint- refer to Hinton's case which is in the TB page 128 and the case slide deck)

a) the advocate

b) the real estate agent selling the property