I understand the TE7 & TE9 relate to PCN GX06778756 which is the one that the bailiffs' enforced and the OP paid up circa £560. The underlying PCN was for parking on the zigzags of a pedestrian crossing. The Op wants to recover the bailiff fees and the TFL charges since no PCN, CC, OfR and Bailiff EN were served.
So what we now need to know is what the OP has put on the TE7 OOT application?
And why have TEC said they are the wrong forms?
AIUI the OP had no notices at all for PCN GX06778756 parking on zigzags at a crossing. At some point the bailiff was paid circa £560 and the TFL website now shows £0 outstanding. The OP phoned the TEC and the TEC emailed a blank TE7 & TE9. These forms have now been submitted to the TEC but we have no inkling as to what exactly has been put on the TE7. I won't be surprised if it's rejected.
Not sure but it appears that the OP originally submitted an SD for GX06778756, it bounced due to no OOT. And in any event they were not the correct forms although the TEC didn't say such.
I now understand the PE3 (Statutory Declaration) to refer to PCN YJ58264268 which is for a ULEZ contravention. It seems the OP received an OfR and completed the SD that was with it. TFL seem to believe that this SD is within time and have re-issued the PCN, sent it to the OP and now the OP has paid it at the £90 discount. The TFL web shows the amount outstanding as £0. So case closed (hopefully). Not sure that the TEC have actually sent the OP a copy of the revoking order though.
But I might have all this entirely wrong as the whole thread is too confusing with two intertwined PCNs for differing contraventions and at differing stages of enforcement.
