Separation - need to leave a joint tenancy!

doodling

Hi,

FlorayG said:

doodling said:

Hi,

You haven't given details of the property and circumstances and hence whether this is an appropriate approach but one area of leverage you have whilst you still live there is to move someone else in to live with you - e.g. member of family, new partner, etc.  

Not allowed without permission from the landlord to have a 'permitted occupier'

And?

Maybe the landlord will evict - isn't that the goal here, to get the tenancy ended, thereby relieving the OP from their obligation to pay all the rent until the end of the fixed term?

Unfortunately the reality is thst such a tenancy clause is practically unenforceable during the fixed term (a court is unlikely to evict because of a breach of that clause) so it won't help from that perspective, but it might affect the ex's approach to the situation.

Hills456

ThisIsWeird said:

Hills456 said:

As I’m moving to my mum’s house there is no second rental but can I say I cannot afford due to children expenses and bills at new house which he’s saying he also won’t pay for? 

No, please don't fib. Just don't mention 'rental' at all, then!

You probably have enough to justify your claim that you won't have enough money left to keep covering your 1/3rd, since your ex has refused to pay maintenance for your kids, and you are currently involved in legal action to resolve this - tell the LL all this, so they better understand the calibre of your ex. Make it clear to the LL that your intention will be to ultimately pay back what you owe them, your contribution to the rent. But if the situation drags on, the accumulated amount will obviously take you longer to repay. It's therefore in everyone's interest to act as soon as is permissible. Therefore, with the LL's understanding, you will 'have to stop paying your 1/3rd as you are fully providing for your children at the moment', and that will leave your ex to pay all the current rent should he wish to remain there (in his misguided hope that you will be stuffed by the LL too), or he can continue to only pay 2/3rds, in which case the LL shoves out a S8 post-haste (with the supporting evidence from you, of your ex's intention).

I am hoping the LL will be of decent calibre, and will take on board the situation. They are the ones who will ultimately make the decision on eviction and how to recover any lost rent (obviously the deposit first!), and they are also presumably the ones who can decide who to chase for this. It would seem, from what other posters on here have said, that they have the freedom to pursue the most likely successful outcome, and that would surely be the remaining tenant - the one who always paid the majority of the rent in any case.

Is your ex able to cover the whole rent, do you think? 

You said in an earlier post, "At the moment it’s direct debit - ex pays 2/3 and I pay 1/3 rent. He is threatening I would need to start paying half." In what form did he make this threat - can you evidence it? Text? Email? That is clearly unreasonable, since he's threatening to make you pay more when you aren't even there. Another poster on here - Ian - suggested that this could amount to "financial abuse as part of a pattern of controlling and coercive behaviour".

Is it part of a pattern? Even if not, I think the vast majority of impartial folk would consider this threat to be unreasonable and hard for him to justify in any practical sense, so it could only be intended as a means of coercion and control. Or punishment & revenge. All of it deplorable, and very possibly criminal.

I'll ask again - is there anyone on his side of the family who could be supportive in this? Have a quiet word with him? If this sorry mess continues to an unpleasant conclusion, isn't the guy aware of what his reputation could be when all the facts come out? Where does he work, for example - how would his colleagues react to this?

Someone needs to have a word in his ear.

He is definitely not able to pay the whole rent. His family could have a word with him, but he's very secretive about things with them, and they don't know half of what's going on. He threatened to increase my share of the rent to half through his solicitor... which obviously in response I am not agreeing to.
I presume I should email LL all this without ex in copy?

ThisIsWeird

Hills456 said:

He is definitely not able to pay the whole rent. His family could have a word with him, but he's very secretive about things with them, and they don't know half of what's going on. He threatened to increase my share of the rent to half through his solicitor... which obviously in response I am not agreeing to.
I presume I should email LL all this without ex in copy?

Ok, that's good - you have evidence.

I have to repeat - I do not know what the best approach here is, but my gut says to be upfront with the LL, just as you'd do if you were the sole tenant. Ie, as soon as you knew you'd struggle to pay the rent, you'd let them know, and arrive at the best way forward.

I'd leave out things like he's threatening to increase your rent share - I don't think that's relevant at the moment, and in any case I cannot see any way he can do this - he can 'demand', but that means jack.

So, an email of explanation to the LL, telling them your relationship has broken down irretrievably (and after ex's behaviour, that's surely a given), and that - for the sake of your children - you've had to move out. Add that your ex is currently refusing to provide any child support, and you are therefore having to handle all these costs fully on your own - you are engaged in legal action over this. Explain that you have asked your ex to agree to end the joint tenancy, but he refuses to do so, and believes he can keep you liable to pay your share. Explain that you will not be able to afford to do this as you are the sole provider for your children, so you will reluctantly have no option but to default on your share of the rent - 1/3rd - very soon. You will ensure that what you owe in rent will be forthcoming in time, but that might have to be after you have won your child support case against your ex. You therefore feel you are doing the right thing in letting the LL know of what is about to happen, and ask that they begin an eviction process as soon as possible when the full rent is not forthcoming, as you currently can see no other alternative.

Something like that.

But - seriously - have you got in touch with CAB yet? Shelter? Have you read the link to Shelter provided by another poster earlier?

theartfullodger

Hills456 said:

I will try to contact shelter and CAB - a private lawyer said I might be throwing good money after bad!!!

Since CaB & SHelter provide free advice sounds like the "private lawyer" doesn't understand matters...

doodling

Hi,

Hills456 said:

ThisIsWeird said:

Hills456 said:

As I’m moving to my mum’s house there is no second rental but can I say I cannot afford due to children expenses and bills at new house which he’s saying he also won’t pay for? 

No, please don't fib. Just don't mention 'rental' at all, then!

You probably have enough to justify your claim that you won't have enough money left to keep covering your 1/3rd, since your ex has refused to pay maintenance for your kids, and you are currently involved in legal action to resolve this - tell the LL all this, so they better understand the calibre of your ex. Make it clear to the LL that your intention will be to ultimately pay back what you owe them, your contribution to the rent. But if the situation drags on, the accumulated amount will obviously take you longer to repay. It's therefore in everyone's interest to act as soon as is permissible. Therefore, with the LL's understanding, you will 'have to stop paying your 1/3rd as you are fully providing for your children at the moment', and that will leave your ex to pay all the current rent should he wish to remain there (in his misguided hope that you will be stuffed by the LL too), or he can continue to only pay 2/3rds, in which case the LL shoves out a S8 post-haste (with the supporting evidence from you, of your ex's intention).

I am hoping the LL will be of decent calibre, and will take on board the situation. They are the ones who will ultimately make the decision on eviction and how to recover any lost rent (obviously the deposit first!), and they are also presumably the ones who can decide who to chase for this. It would seem, from what other posters on here have said, that they have the freedom to pursue the most likely successful outcome, and that would surely be the remaining tenant - the one who always paid the majority of the rent in any case.

Is your ex able to cover the whole rent, do you think? 

You said in an earlier post, "At the moment it’s direct debit - ex pays 2/3 and I pay 1/3 rent. He is threatening I would need to start paying half." In what form did he make this threat - can you evidence it? Text? Email? That is clearly unreasonable, since he's threatening to make you pay more when you aren't even there. Another poster on here - Ian - suggested that this could amount to "financial abuse as part of a pattern of controlling and coercive behaviour".

Is it part of a pattern? Even if not, I think the vast majority of impartial folk would consider this threat to be unreasonable and hard for him to justify in any practical sense, so it could only be intended as a means of coercion and control. Or punishment & revenge. All of it deplorable, and very possibly criminal.

I'll ask again - is there anyone on his side of the family who could be supportive in this? Have a quiet word with him? If this sorry mess continues to an unpleasant conclusion, isn't the guy aware of what his reputation could be when all the facts come out? Where does he work, for example - how would his colleagues react to this?

Someone needs to have a word in his ear.

He is definitely not able to pay the whole rent. His family could have a word with him, but he's very secretive about things with them, and they don't know half of what's going on. He threatened to increase my share of the rent to half through his solicitor... which obviously in response I am not agreeing to.
I presume I should email LL all this without ex in copy?

If they can't pay the rent without you then you are in a stronger position that if they could.

I would stop paying the rent.  Feel free to tell the landlord why if you want - they won't be happy but that is life.

The landlord may come after one or both of you for unpaid rent but once the arrears have reached 2 months I would also expect the landlord to start possession proceedings against you and the ex.  You want those possession proceedings to succeed.

At the end of this you will owe rent and court costs, but hopefully it will be smaller number than if you were stuck until the end of the fixed term.

You have a long standing agreement with your ex that you would pay one third of the rent, your ex has no obvious basis to change that now - what reason for the change have they come up with?

saajan_12

doodling said:

Hi,

Hills456 said:

ThisIsWeird said:

Hills456 said:

As I’m moving to my mum’s house there is no second rental but can I say I cannot afford due to children expenses and bills at new house which he’s saying he also won’t pay for? 

No, please don't fib. Just don't mention 'rental' at all, then!

You probably have enough to justify your claim that you won't have enough money left to keep covering your 1/3rd, since your ex has refused to pay maintenance for your kids, and you are currently involved in legal action to resolve this - tell the LL all this, so they better understand the calibre of your ex. Make it clear to the LL that your intention will be to ultimately pay back what you owe them, your contribution to the rent. But if the situation drags on, the accumulated amount will obviously take you longer to repay. It's therefore in everyone's interest to act as soon as is permissible. Therefore, with the LL's understanding, you will 'have to stop paying your 1/3rd as you are fully providing for your children at the moment', and that will leave your ex to pay all the current rent should he wish to remain there (in his misguided hope that you will be stuffed by the LL too), or he can continue to only pay 2/3rds, in which case the LL shoves out a S8 post-haste (with the supporting evidence from you, of your ex's intention).

I am hoping the LL will be of decent calibre, and will take on board the situation. They are the ones who will ultimately make the decision on eviction and how to recover any lost rent (obviously the deposit first!), and they are also presumably the ones who can decide who to chase for this. It would seem, from what other posters on here have said, that they have the freedom to pursue the most likely successful outcome, and that would surely be the remaining tenant - the one who always paid the majority of the rent in any case.

Is your ex able to cover the whole rent, do you think? 

You said in an earlier post, "At the moment it’s direct debit - ex pays 2/3 and I pay 1/3 rent. He is threatening I would need to start paying half." In what form did he make this threat - can you evidence it? Text? Email? That is clearly unreasonable, since he's threatening to make you pay more when you aren't even there. Another poster on here - Ian - suggested that this could amount to "financial abuse as part of a pattern of controlling and coercive behaviour".

Is it part of a pattern? Even if not, I think the vast majority of impartial folk would consider this threat to be unreasonable and hard for him to justify in any practical sense, so it could only be intended as a means of coercion and control. Or punishment & revenge. All of it deplorable, and very possibly criminal.

I'll ask again - is there anyone on his side of the family who could be supportive in this? Have a quiet word with him? If this sorry mess continues to an unpleasant conclusion, isn't the guy aware of what his reputation could be when all the facts come out? Where does he work, for example - how would his colleagues react to this?

Someone needs to have a word in his ear.

He is definitely not able to pay the whole rent. His family could have a word with him, but he's very secretive about things with them, and they don't know half of what's going on. He threatened to increase my share of the rent to half through his solicitor... which obviously in response I am not agreeing to.
I presume I should email LL all this without ex in copy?

If they can't pay the rent without you then you are in a stronger position that if they could.

I would stop paying the rent.  Feel free to tell the landlord why if you want - they won't be happy but that is life.

The landlord may come after one or both of you for unpaid rent but once the arrears have reached 2 months I would also expect the landlord to start possession proceedings against you and the ex.  You want those possession proceedings to succeed.

At the end of this you will owe rent and court costs, but hopefully it will be smaller number than if you were stuck until the end of the fixed term.

You have a long standing agreement with your ex that you would pay one third of the rent, your ex has no obvious basis to change that now - what reason for the change have they come up with?

This is the right practical answer. You could keep discussing and craft teh perfect explanation for the LL from now until the end of the lease but it won't make any actual difference. Best case, they are understanding and can't do anything about it currently. Worst case, they are angry with you and can't do anything about it currently. End result = same. 

ThisIsWeird

saajan_12 said:

doodling said:

Hi,

Hills456 said:

ThisIsWeird said:

Hills456 said:

As I’m moving to my mum’s house there is no second rental but can I say I cannot afford due to children expenses and bills at new house which he’s saying he also won’t pay for? 

No, please don't fib. Just don't mention 'rental' at all, then!

You probably have enough to justify your claim that you won't have enough money left to keep covering your 1/3rd, since your ex has refused to pay maintenance for your kids, and you are currently involved in legal action to resolve this - tell the LL all this, so they better understand the calibre of your ex. Make it clear to the LL that your intention will be to ultimately pay back what you owe them, your contribution to the rent. But if the situation drags on, the accumulated amount will obviously take you longer to repay. It's therefore in everyone's interest to act as soon as is permissible. Therefore, with the LL's understanding, you will 'have to stop paying your 1/3rd as you are fully providing for your children at the moment', and that will leave your ex to pay all the current rent should he wish to remain there (in his misguided hope that you will be stuffed by the LL too), or he can continue to only pay 2/3rds, in which case the LL shoves out a S8 post-haste (with the supporting evidence from you, of your ex's intention).

I am hoping the LL will be of decent calibre, and will take on board the situation. They are the ones who will ultimately make the decision on eviction and how to recover any lost rent (obviously the deposit first!), and they are also presumably the ones who can decide who to chase for this. It would seem, from what other posters on here have said, that they have the freedom to pursue the most likely successful outcome, and that would surely be the remaining tenant - the one who always paid the majority of the rent in any case.

Is your ex able to cover the whole rent, do you think? 

You said in an earlier post, "At the moment it’s direct debit - ex pays 2/3 and I pay 1/3 rent. He is threatening I would need to start paying half." In what form did he make this threat - can you evidence it? Text? Email? That is clearly unreasonable, since he's threatening to make you pay more when you aren't even there. Another poster on here - Ian - suggested that this could amount to "financial abuse as part of a pattern of controlling and coercive behaviour".

Is it part of a pattern? Even if not, I think the vast majority of impartial folk would consider this threat to be unreasonable and hard for him to justify in any practical sense, so it could only be intended as a means of coercion and control. Or punishment & revenge. All of it deplorable, and very possibly criminal.

I'll ask again - is there anyone on his side of the family who could be supportive in this? Have a quiet word with him? If this sorry mess continues to an unpleasant conclusion, isn't the guy aware of what his reputation could be when all the facts come out? Where does he work, for example - how would his colleagues react to this?

Someone needs to have a word in his ear.

He is definitely not able to pay the whole rent. His family could have a word with him, but he's very secretive about things with them, and they don't know half of what's going on. He threatened to increase my share of the rent to half through his solicitor... which obviously in response I am not agreeing to.
I presume I should email LL all this without ex in copy?

If they can't pay the rent without you then you are in a stronger position that if they could.

I would stop paying the rent.  Feel free to tell the landlord why if you want - they won't be happy but that is life.

The landlord may come after one or both of you for unpaid rent but once the arrears have reached 2 months I would also expect the landlord to start possession proceedings against you and the ex.  You want those possession proceedings to succeed.

At the end of this you will owe rent and court costs, but hopefully it will be smaller number than if you were stuck until the end of the fixed term.

You have a long standing agreement with your ex that you would pay one third of the rent, your ex has no obvious basis to change that now - what reason for the change have they come up with?

This is the right practical answer. You could keep discussing and craft teh perfect explanation for the LL from now until the end of the lease but it won't make any actual difference. Best case, they are understanding and can't do anything about it currently. Worst case, they are angry with you and can't do anything about it currently. End result = same. 

Couldn't the best case be that the LL makes it clear to the remaining tenant that they will be the first to be pursued for any missing rent, ideally giving the fellow a dose of reality, and possibly even persuading him that the best thing he can do - for himself - is sign the termination doc and move out?
If so, how likely is that to occur if the OP simply defaults with a, "the LL won't be happy, but that's life"?

doodling

Hi,

ThisIsWeird said:

saajan_12 said:

doodling said:

Hi,

Hills456 said:

ThisIsWeird said:

Hills456 said:

As I’m moving to my mum’s house there is no second rental but can I say I cannot afford due to children expenses and bills at new house which he’s saying he also won’t pay for? 

No, please don't fib. Just don't mention 'rental' at all, then!

You probably have enough to justify your claim that you won't have enough money left to keep covering your 1/3rd, since your ex has refused to pay maintenance for your kids, and you are currently involved in legal action to resolve this - tell the LL all this, so they better understand the calibre of your ex. Make it clear to the LL that your intention will be to ultimately pay back what you owe them, your contribution to the rent. But if the situation drags on, the accumulated amount will obviously take you longer to repay. It's therefore in everyone's interest to act as soon as is permissible. Therefore, with the LL's understanding, you will 'have to stop paying your 1/3rd as you are fully providing for your children at the moment', and that will leave your ex to pay all the current rent should he wish to remain there (in his misguided hope that you will be stuffed by the LL too), or he can continue to only pay 2/3rds, in which case the LL shoves out a S8 post-haste (with the supporting evidence from you, of your ex's intention).

I am hoping the LL will be of decent calibre, and will take on board the situation. They are the ones who will ultimately make the decision on eviction and how to recover any lost rent (obviously the deposit first!), and they are also presumably the ones who can decide who to chase for this. It would seem, from what other posters on here have said, that they have the freedom to pursue the most likely successful outcome, and that would surely be the remaining tenant - the one who always paid the majority of the rent in any case.

Is your ex able to cover the whole rent, do you think? 

You said in an earlier post, "At the moment it’s direct debit - ex pays 2/3 and I pay 1/3 rent. He is threatening I would need to start paying half." In what form did he make this threat - can you evidence it? Text? Email? That is clearly unreasonable, since he's threatening to make you pay more when you aren't even there. Another poster on here - Ian - suggested that this could amount to "financial abuse as part of a pattern of controlling and coercive behaviour".

Is it part of a pattern? Even if not, I think the vast majority of impartial folk would consider this threat to be unreasonable and hard for him to justify in any practical sense, so it could only be intended as a means of coercion and control. Or punishment & revenge. All of it deplorable, and very possibly criminal.

I'll ask again - is there anyone on his side of the family who could be supportive in this? Have a quiet word with him? If this sorry mess continues to an unpleasant conclusion, isn't the guy aware of what his reputation could be when all the facts come out? Where does he work, for example - how would his colleagues react to this?

Someone needs to have a word in his ear.

He is definitely not able to pay the whole rent. His family could have a word with him, but he's very secretive about things with them, and they don't know half of what's going on. He threatened to increase my share of the rent to half through his solicitor... which obviously in response I am not agreeing to.
I presume I should email LL all this without ex in copy?

If they can't pay the rent without you then you are in a stronger position that if they could.

I would stop paying the rent.  Feel free to tell the landlord why if you want - they won't be happy but that is life.

The landlord may come after one or both of you for unpaid rent but once the arrears have reached 2 months I would also expect the landlord to start possession proceedings against you and the ex.  You want those possession proceedings to succeed.

At the end of this you will owe rent and court costs, but hopefully it will be smaller number than if you were stuck until the end of the fixed term.

You have a long standing agreement with your ex that you would pay one third of the rent, your ex has no obvious basis to change that now - what reason for the change have they come up with?

This is the right practical answer. You could keep discussing and craft teh perfect explanation for the LL from now until the end of the lease but it won't make any actual difference. Best case, they are understanding and can't do anything about it currently. Worst case, they are angry with you and can't do anything about it currently. End result = same. 

Couldn't the best case be that the LL makes it clear to the remaining tenant that they will be the first to be pursued for any missing rent, ideally giving the fellow a dose of reality, and possibly even persuading him that the best thing he can do - for himself - is sign the termination doc and move out?
If so, how likely is that to occur if the OP simply defaults with a, "the LL won't be happy, but that's life"?

The OP has no control over the landlord’s behaviour and it would be a foolish landlord that got involved in a dispute between their tenants.  The landlord shouldn't care why he isn't getting the rent.  The landlord has no reason to prefer the pursuit of one tenant over the other for unpaid rent.

Once arrears grow to two months then, unless there is an astoundingly good reason not to, most landlords will start thinking about eviction.

Eviction generally happens before action to recover unpaid rent (or the two occur together) because the amount of rent that is unpaid isn't known until the tenant has gone (and the landlord often doesn't have access to the property to see if they need to claim for damage as well).

Hills456

Thank you for all responses - I have emailed landlord stating the whole situation, and that I would like to resolve it amicably, that I cannot afford the rent when I move out. I am now going to email ex to attempt to end the tenancy jointly. Should I tell him that I plan to default on my payments if he doesn't agree to end the tenancy? The other option I will give ex is I could find someone to replace me.

ThisIsWeird

doodling said:

Hi,

ThisIsWeird said:

saajan_12 said:

doodling said:

Hi,

Hills456 said:

ThisIsWeird said:

Hills456 said:

As I’m moving to my mum’s house there is no second rental but can I say I cannot afford due to children expenses and bills at new house which he’s saying he also won’t pay for? 

No, please don't fib. Just don't mention 'rental' at all, then!

You probably have enough to justify your claim that you won't have enough money left to keep covering your 1/3rd, since your ex has refused to pay maintenance for your kids, and you are currently involved in legal action to resolve this - tell the LL all this, so they better understand the calibre of your ex. Make it clear to the LL that your intention will be to ultimately pay back what you owe them, your contribution to the rent. But if the situation drags on, the accumulated amount will obviously take you longer to repay. It's therefore in everyone's interest to act as soon as is permissible. Therefore, with the LL's understanding, you will 'have to stop paying your 1/3rd as you are fully providing for your children at the moment', and that will leave your ex to pay all the current rent should he wish to remain there (in his misguided hope that you will be stuffed by the LL too), or he can continue to only pay 2/3rds, in which case the LL shoves out a S8 post-haste (with the supporting evidence from you, of your ex's intention).

I am hoping the LL will be of decent calibre, and will take on board the situation. They are the ones who will ultimately make the decision on eviction and how to recover any lost rent (obviously the deposit first!), and they are also presumably the ones who can decide who to chase for this. It would seem, from what other posters on here have said, that they have the freedom to pursue the most likely successful outcome, and that would surely be the remaining tenant - the one who always paid the majority of the rent in any case.

Is your ex able to cover the whole rent, do you think? 

You said in an earlier post, "At the moment it’s direct debit - ex pays 2/3 and I pay 1/3 rent. He is threatening I would need to start paying half." In what form did he make this threat - can you evidence it? Text? Email? That is clearly unreasonable, since he's threatening to make you pay more when you aren't even there. Another poster on here - Ian - suggested that this could amount to "financial abuse as part of a pattern of controlling and coercive behaviour".

Is it part of a pattern? Even if not, I think the vast majority of impartial folk would consider this threat to be unreasonable and hard for him to justify in any practical sense, so it could only be intended as a means of coercion and control. Or punishment & revenge. All of it deplorable, and very possibly criminal.

I'll ask again - is there anyone on his side of the family who could be supportive in this? Have a quiet word with him? If this sorry mess continues to an unpleasant conclusion, isn't the guy aware of what his reputation could be when all the facts come out? Where does he work, for example - how would his colleagues react to this?

Someone needs to have a word in his ear.

He is definitely not able to pay the whole rent. His family could have a word with him, but he's very secretive about things with them, and they don't know half of what's going on. He threatened to increase my share of the rent to half through his solicitor... which obviously in response I am not agreeing to.
I presume I should email LL all this without ex in copy?

If they can't pay the rent without you then you are in a stronger position that if they could.

I would stop paying the rent.  Feel free to tell the landlord why if you want - they won't be happy but that is life.

The landlord may come after one or both of you for unpaid rent but once the arrears have reached 2 months I would also expect the landlord to start possession proceedings against you and the ex.  You want those possession proceedings to succeed.

At the end of this you will owe rent and court costs, but hopefully it will be smaller number than if you were stuck until the end of the fixed term.

You have a long standing agreement with your ex that you would pay one third of the rent, your ex has no obvious basis to change that now - what reason for the change have they come up with?

This is the right practical answer. You could keep discussing and craft teh perfect explanation for the LL from now until the end of the lease but it won't make any actual difference. Best case, they are understanding and can't do anything about it currently. Worst case, they are angry with you and can't do anything about it currently. End result = same. 

Couldn't the best case be that the LL makes it clear to the remaining tenant that they will be the first to be pursued for any missing rent, ideally giving the fellow a dose of reality, and possibly even persuading him that the best thing he can do - for himself - is sign the termination doc and move out?
If so, how likely is that to occur if the OP simply defaults with a, "the LL won't be happy, but that's life"?

The OP has no control over the landlord’s behaviour and it would be a foolish landlord that got involved in a dispute between their tenants.  The landlord shouldn't care why he isn't getting the rent.  The landlord has no reason to prefer the pursuit of one tenant over the other for unpaid rent.
Once arrears grow to two months then, unless there is an astoundingly good reason not to, most landlords will start thinking about eviction.
Eviction generally happens before action to recover unpaid rent (or the two occur together) because the amount of rent that is unpaid isn't known until the tenant has gone (and the landlord often doesn't have access to the property to see if they need to claim for damage as well).

Absolutely, but that's not what I said.
I'm suggesting that the OP does the 'right thing', which is to inform their LL of the issue, explain the circumstances, make it clear that they will be defaulting on their rent payments, and why.
Instead of just stopping payments, and waiting for the outcome - 'if they don't like it, that's life'.
Lots of reasons to do this the 'right way';
1). It should save time, potentially lots, and that's very important for the OP, as it also will be for the LL.
2) It'll make it clear the situation ain't going to change, so that saves the LL or their agent trying to negotiate delayed payments, holidays, and all that messy and pointless malarkey.
3) it'll make the LL aware that the two parties involved have completely different approaches - one wishes to do the right thing and terminated correctly, and the other wants to sit on it and let the rental shortfall increase.
4) one wishes to leave, and the other stay put, regardless
5) one contributes twice as much to the current rental, so is the candidate to first pursue for any shortfall - especially as they are the one creating the situation.
6) one has sole child care commitments, so is not only less likely to be able to make up any shortfall - which is not even of their doing - but there will also be a 'moral' element in pursuing them for this at this stage.
6) one has been completely upfront about the situation, and the other is a manipulative toerag.
Given all that, can I ask - if you were this landlord, would you appreciate your tenant's approach as I suggested above, or would it not make any difference to you? Would you appreciate the heads-up, so you can get your paperwork ready? Would you be grateful for an assurance that at least one tenant's contributions will be forthcoming once it's sorted? Would it be good to just 'know' what's going on?
Whether it'll make any practical difference, who knows. But it shows a level of trust and respect between the LL and at least one tenant.