Darwin real estate agent Suzi Milgate fights to licence cancellation, despite it expiring two weeks ago

A Darwin real estate agent accused of slapping a cream crepe in the Chief Minister’s face and harassing renters is fighting to keep her licence - despite letting the professional credentials expire.

Suzi Milgate appeared in the NT Civil and Administrative Tribunal on Friday seeking to stop a decision by the Licencing Board of the Northern Territory to cancel her real estate licence. Picture: Pema Tamang Pakhrin

A Darwin woman who allegedly attacked the Chief Minister with a cream crepe is fighting to keep her real estate licence, despite letting it expire amid accusations she harassed and intimidated renters.

Suzi Milgate appeared in the NT Civil and Administrative Tribunal on Friday seeking to stop a decision by the Licencing Board of the Northern Territory to cancel her real estate licence.

Ms Milgate said the January decision was “unreasonable and excessive” and had put 33 renters and a number of property sales in jeopardy.

Her lawyer David Gomez told the Tribunal that his client was only given seven days notice over a long weekend holiday before her license was revoked on January 31, 2024.

“The important thing is that the applicant has been given three working days to respond to a decision which … affects her livelihood, her sole source of income,” Mr Gomez said.

He said within those three days she had to cancel tenancy agreements, work out her legal obligations to landlords and tenants, cancel property sales, and reorganise rental trust accounts, all while also seeking legal advice to challenge the licence revokal.

“To require her within three days to wind things up completely, at the face of it, that seems to be a pretty unreasonably short period of time,” NTCAT president Mark O’Reilly said.

However the Licencing board legal representative Abhishek Jain disagreed that Ms Milgate was denied “natural justice”.

“The Board did outline and reiterate that her status was unlicensed, and the reasons why that was the case, and that she should not be continuing to practice anyway, shape or form from January 31 onwards,” Mr Jain said.

Suzi Milgate appeared in the NT Civil and Administrative Tribunal on Friday seeking to stop a decision by the Licencing Board of the Northern Territory to cancel her real estate licence. Picture: Pema Tamang Pakhrin

Mr Jain said while Ms Milgate had told the public and clients that she was no longer a real estate agent, the board had not “seen any proof of trading ceasing to take place”.

“Any form of trading, holding on to, receiving bonds or receiving our rental — is doing so unlicensed,” Mr Jain said.

“As far as whether the client’s action has taken place for that or not, technically, it is possible that prosecutions will take place by unlicensed trading.”

However, he pointed out that even if the Tribunal did choose to temporarily pause the decision, Ms Milgate would still be unlicensed as her licence had expired on February 6.

Ms Milgate acknowledged she only paid for the renewal the day after it expired.

Mr O’Reilly questioned what practical difference the stay application would make, given it was a choice between a revoked licence and an expired one.

Mr Jain said “like any other profession”, Ms Milgate was required to pass on her clients to another real estate agent — warning that the Supreme Court may have to step in unless a more “amicable” solution could be found.

Mr Jain said Ms Milgate could still reapply for a real estate licence, warning she may not be considered a “ fit and proper person”.

Ms Milgate — who is fighting a charge of assaulting former Chief Minister Natasha Fyles with a crepe — has accumulated more than $18,000 in fines from the Agents Licensing Board.

Ms Milgate was fined $3140 in November after threatening to evict and call the cops on a woman she alleged was running an Only Fans account, a subscription-based service used primarily by sex workers.

In another incident Ms Milgate was fined $10,000 after falsely accusing two Bakewell tenants of lying about home break ins, and contacting their employers to accuse them of lying.

Mr Gomez said Ms Milgate believed she had strong grounds for an appeal as it only concerned three of 33 tenants — calling the decision “reactive” and “excessive”.

The tribunal hearing was adjourned for further submissions.