Hi Tony,

 > Thanks for the reply, spose my beef is that we werent informed, neither were
 > our clients (the are all local councils) that we would no longer be able to
 > "officially" change any data at the registry.

I was rather surprised that that any subdomains of sa.gov.au weren't DNS
hosted on sa.gov.au boxes, whatever secondary servers they might employ.
Perhaps that's where they're heading now?

 > Most of the records have been simply hacked on, some of the tech nics etc
 > are way out of date, and I am confised as to where I officially fit into the
 > picture

Know the feeling ..

 > I am temporarily using 2003 .net servers for DNS, which is why there are
 > botches in the records lol (I know ... you dont have to say it lol)

Ok, I won't .. if you'll excuse my poor assumption that nameservers of
any substance would naturally be running on *x boxes :)

This problem seems to be upstream, as DK sussed out, but if you're not
supposed to be now authoritative for these subdomains, might it not be
best to stop serving them, ie pull your zonefiles?  While the DNS should
adjust and ignore undelegated or misdelegated servers, I've seen ongoing
confusion and periodic SOA pingpong disagreements lasting months.

Years ago, an unnamed ISP hereabouts went bellyup, yet kept misdirecting
all DNS queries for the domain's MX into a slow black hole for well over
a year - via another ISP who ignored complaints - denying working email
to acquired customers of the poor bugger who (thought he'd) bought the
business, but who never achieved direct delegation for the old domain :(

Moral being, I'm overall glad that AuDA is able to corral some cowboys. 
(nothing to do with your problem of course; just changing the subject :)

Cheers, Ian