Denise is looking to open a florist shop in a heritage listed building situated adjacent to the railway station at Mulgrave, near Richmond. The building has previously been used as a post office, but is now unoccupied and is being offered for sale.

Before making an offer to buy the property, Denise telephones the Hawkesbury City Council to investigate the current zoning of the property. She speaks to Ben, a receptionist, who informs Denise that all of the planning advisors are currently busy. Denise says she is in a hurry and Ben responds that his belief is that, if a post office has previously been operating in this building, then it should be fine to use it for another commercial purpose. Ben also gives Denise the email address for one of the planning officers.

The next day Denise writes up her query regarding the zoning of the post office building in a letter, signs it and emails it, as an attachment, to the planning officer.

The following week Denise receives a formal response from the planning officer, on council letterhead, stating that the building referred to is currently zoned commercial mixed-use and therefore a florist business would be within the permitted uses.

• the basis of this letter, Denise makes an offer to purchase the property, and this is immediately accepted.
• turns out the planning officer mixed up Denise's request with another property and the building is actually zoned residential, with a one-off special use permit provided to the operator of the post office. It now looks unlikely that Denise would ever be able to operate a florist business in this building. Further, the proximity to the noisy railway station, renders the property undesirable for residential use, meaning that Denise would only be able to sell the property for significantly less than she originally paid for it.

Advise Denise on the likelihood of success in bringing an action against the Hawkesbury City Council for negligent misstatement. Your answer must be provided in the IRAC format and your arguments must be fully supported with statute or case law.