Which of the following statement(s) is/are incorrect?

Options

A. In `[CrBrCl(en)_(2)]^(+)` geometrical isomerism exists, while optical isomerism does not exist
B. Potassium aquadicyanosuperoxoperoxoperoxoch-romate(III) is IUPAC name `K_(2)[Br(N)_(2)O_(2)(O_(2))(H_(2)O)]`
C. There are 3 geometriacl and 15 stereoisomers possible for `[Pt(NO_(2))(NH_(3))(NH_(2)OH)(py)]^(+)` and `[PtBrCl(NO_(2))(NH_(3))(py)]` respectively
D. cis and trans forms are not diastereomers to each other

Explanation

To determine which of the statements given in the question are incorrect, we will analyze each statement one by one.

### Step-by-Step Solution:

1. **Statement 1**: "In CR, BR, CL, E and whole twice geometrical isomerism are going to exist while optical isomerism does not exist."
- **Analysis**: This statement is incorrect. In certain coordination complexes, such as those with cis configurations, optical isomerism can indeed exist. For example, if we consider a complex with two identical bromo and chloro ligands in a cis arrangement, the complex can exhibit optical isomerism due to the non-superimposable mirror images. Therefore, this statement is false.

2. **Statement 2**: "Potassium aquired disino superoxo peroxo oxochromate."
- **Analysis**: The name provided in this statement is misleading. The term "disino" suggests the presence of two cyano (CN) ligands, but there is no nitrogen present in the complex as described. Additionally, the use of "peroxo" twice is not standard in IUPAC nomenclature. Therefore, this statement is also incorrect.

3. **Statement 3**: "There are three geometrical and 15 stereoisomers possible for this type of complexes."
- **Analysis**: This statement is incorrect. The number of stereoisomers for a coordination complex depends on the specific ligands and their arrangements. For many coordination complexes, the number of stereoisomers can be calculated using specific formulas. In this case, the correct number of stereoisomers is 13, not 15. Hence, this statement is false.

4. **Statement 4**: "Cis and trans forms are not diastereomers of each other."
- **Analysis**: This statement is incorrect. Cis and trans forms of a compound are indeed diastereomers. Diastereomers are stereoisomers that are not mirror images of each other, and cis and trans configurations fit this definition. Therefore, this statement is also false.

### Conclusion:
Based on the analysis above, all four statements are incorrect.

**Incorrect Statements**:
- Statement 1
- Statement 2
- Statement 3
- Statement 4