Saanvi rents a shop in her local suburb for a five year term, paying a monthly rental of $2000 plus rates and other expenses. She establish a business selling carpets and rugs which are imported from overseas, and she is able to make reasonably good profit from the business. After trading for about 6 months, Saanvi discovers that recent fluctuations in currency value in Australia and overseas have resulted in an increase in th elanded cost of her stock by about 50%, and, as a result, she can no longer sell her stock at a profit. Saanvi approaches Huang, her landlord, and notifies him that she will have to terminate the lease and vacate the shop because of her inability to make a profit in her business. Huang wants Saanvi to stay in the shop, and offer to reduce the monthly rental to $1000 until things improve. Because of Huang's promise to reduce the monthly rent, Saanvi decide to stay and pays the reduced rent. However, after a further 6 months, Saanvi is still not making a profit and leaves the shop. A week later, Saanvi receives notifications of legal proceedings issued by Huang, claiming the sum of $6000 form Saanvi. Huang claims in the legal proceedings that the sum of $6000 is 'arrears of rental on the shop'.
Advise Saanvi whether she has to pay the sum of $6000 now being claimed by Huang. Does it related to all elements of promissory estoppel below?
Elements of promissory estoppel:
 A clear and unambiguous promise made by the promisor.
 Reliance by the promisee on the promise.
 The reliance must be both reasonable and foreseeable.
 The party asserting the estoppel must be injured by his reliance