JOHN TERRY faces a mega £800,000 bill over the Anton Ferdinand race row.
By ROB BEASLEY
And Chelsea will not pay a penny of it.
JT was “disappointed” after the FA yesterday found him guilty of racially abusing the QPR defender.
He copped a four-game ban and an FA record £220,000 fine.
But that is only a fraction of the sum Chelsea’s captain spent fighting his case.
Terry, 31, has run up legal fees estimated at £750,000 battling his criminal and FA charges.
He hopes to recoup around £400,000 from the court case, where he was found not guilty.
But the ex-England skipper is now liable to pay the costs of the FA hearing, too, said to be at least £200,000.
That brings his total bill to a whopping £770,000.
But if Terry decides to continue his fight and appeal against the FA’s punishment, his legal bill will rise even further.
A statement issued on his behalf said: “Mr Terry is disappointed that the FA commission has reached a different conclusion to the clear not guilty verdict of a court of law.
“He has asked for the detailed written reasons of the decision and will consider them carefully before deciding whether to lodge an appeal.”
Terry has 14 days from receiving the FA commission’s written report to decide what to do next.
His fine and ban will be suspended until any appeal is heard, the 14 days expire or Terry announces he will not appeal.
But if the Blues defender does appeal and loses, the FA’s punishment could be increased.
Terry announced on Sunday he was quitting international football, claiming the FA had made his position in the England team untenable by continuing to persue the charge against him.
Westminster Magistrates cleared him in July of racially abusing Ferdinand, 27, after Chelsea’s Premier League clash at QPR last October.
Terry admitted in court using obscene words towards Ferdinand — but not as a racist insult.
A club statement last night said: “Chelsea Football Club notes and respects today’s decision.
“We also recognise that John has the right to appeal that decision.
“It is therefore inappropriate for us to comment further on the matter at this time.”