Anecdotally I've been hearing at my university, that application levels for the small number of postdocs that can be advertised during a hiring freeze are very high and that the HR side is very slow as their systems don't work too well away from the university network. I'd give it a month to 6 weeks before writing things off at the moment.

You might find this helpful: https://fundsonline.org.uk/ But the problem is that the sums of money are often small and one-off. I really doubt (particularly given the recession to come) that you could pull enough together and it would be a near constant task.
Is the choice of Huddersfield to work with a particular expert? Huddersfield isn't covered by AHRC PhD funding as far as I can tell, but Leeds, York and Sheffield are in the White Rose partnership. Their next deadline would be January 2021 but that would give you time to identify suitable supervisors and work on a proposal. It might be an option if you have a strong academic background or if the research might interest a collaborative sponsor.

German universities tend not to be flexible in my experience but if you did a year abroad at a university, studying in German, you may have done the exam already? I know I had to pass one to enrol.

What I meant by holding off, is that personally I wouldn't waste good contacts by speculatively emailing at a point, when the PIs don't know what's going to happen, when in a month things might be a bit clearer regarding funding (will new projects be delayed, or extensions given), the REF, when universities might be able to reopen etc. Applying for an actual job is rather different and of course you should do that.

+1 with Nead - delete that email if it's anything like your post. It will only make you sound like you're not prepared to do the work for your thesis that you've been asked to do. Let's face it, if we're lucky enough just to be bored and frustrated right now, then we're the fortunate ones who aren't dealing with illness and bereavement.

I think you probably would need to work out whether it would be viable to support yourself for 1.5-2 years in this place (and if you need a visa whether that would be a problem). It might be worth asking about provision to study part-time etc and if there are any fees that might apply to you after the funding runs out. If he's making it clear that he's retiring on a certain date, does that mean he's running his lab down? Would you be supervised if you weren't finished? Sorry for all the pessimistic questions but a friend got very badly abandoned in a similar position, so it might be worth asking upfront.

On the impact of the pandemic, it seems that some university systems will be hit worse than others. It sounds like the USA is preparing for major cuts even at Ivy League universities, but somehow I'd imagine the Sweden / Norway type countries will have fewer cutbacks.

Many universities have announced / will announce next week hiring freezes unless 'business critical' as the pandemic is leaving many institutions in real financial danger from what I'm hearing from my own institution and friends elsewhere. Unfortunately postdocs are unlikely to ever be seen as business critical. If you can, it might be better to hold off for a bit, and see if the government is going to bail out universities (see BBC and Guardian reports on this today) and then things may loosen up a bit. I'd also be looking at industry options very seriously.

I think there's several reasons, some with more merit than others.
1) There are so few jobs in the humanities that you have to be extremely good to stand a chance. It's very different to the sciences where it's relatively easy to get a postdoc. This means there will be lots of very appointable people applying for each job, and any imperfection rules you out. If you've not been socialised to understand the market as you've not got supervisors who are particularly well-networked themselves, you're at an immediate disadvantage. Most PhDs from ex-polys have that disadvantage unless they've been savvy enough to spot knowledge gaps and get advice.
2) There are fewer PhD students in the ex-poly departments (again talking humanities here), so they tend to get swamped with teaching that they're told is a career necessity, and offered less exposure to cutting edge research through visiting speakers etc. They are also often disadvantaged in access to methods training courses. There is quite simply less money floating around to pay for those things. This means their skill set may be less well-aligned with what research-focused universities are looking for.
3) Some not all humanities subjects are very stratified. There is a firm belief that the best go to Oxford/Cambridge/UCL and therefore that's where you should recruit from. It's not quite as bad as in the US where pedigree as they call it there, and recommendations from top names are more important than what's on the cv, but it's getting there.
There are plenty of good humanities academics working in ex-polys, and like I say I think some subjects are more open-minded that others. But the OP is going to have to work that little bit harder to stand out, which is why I think her concern that her project isn't strong, is actually the stronger reason to consider moving.

I think this might depend on what subject. I'm a social scientist but from talking to colleagues, I have been given the impression that this matters a lot in philosophy but not at all in media studies. I'd be more worried though about your description of your project as not strong - if there's not much chance of good publications because the methods or theory are flawed then I think that would scupper you.
If you stay put, make sure you understand how your subject works - which associations should you join, what conferences are best to go to, what does a strong job candidate in your field look like. If you are in a not very research active department, the staff may not know this themselves, so you might have to be proactive in seeking 'professionalisation' training. In my subject, the main associations have postgrad networks that offer lots of this - you might find the same.

I'm sorry that this has happened. I would prioritise two things. Check in with your supervisor and ask where you stand with the uni. And talk to the university visa team asap- if you're on a tier 4 visa you really need to know if you've been reported to UKBA for non-attendance, so if necessary you can get legal advice.

I would imagine non-student members might be an issue for insurance. I'd advise against tbh as you're no longer a student. Students don't necessarily want staff hanging around their leisure activities and it could create conflicts of interest especially if you are teaching.
In terms of working patterns I'd imagine it will depend on the culture of that lab and any local access rules. You'll just have to play it by ear.

I think most people come out of their viva fixated on the negative bits and forgetting the positive bits, which if you got minor corrections there must be a lot of and I suspect your report will reflect that. It is just stressful to be on the spot like that and that is a natural reaction - it's like getting teaching evaluations and obsessing about the only nasty remark in a sea of good things. They can't ask you to do any major revisions in three months as it has to be doable. Relax, celebrate, talk to your supervisors if they had chance to speak with the examiners but really you've done well.

A US PhD in my subject takes on average 8 years. Most do not get academic jobs. It's not easy to find non-academic jobs when you've spent the last 12 years in education (BA + PhD).

I also think that very few prospective PhD students can foresee what doing a PhD is really like. Doing well on a taught course doesn't mean that you'll necessarily thrive on or enjoy doing a PhD. Supervisors can't change the realities of it, and it does mean some who are unsuited to independent research will fail upgrades. If that happens, it's easier psychologically to blame everyone but yourself. Similarly, students' situations change - ill-health, interests, career ideas - there are many things that prevent completion however good the supervisory relationship is. In other words attrition rates are also if not more about student performance and circumstances, as you can change supervisors but it's not so easy to fix other things.

I think you forgot to evaluate yourself! It sounds like you thought that a very successful lab was what you wanted but actually you prefer something more nurturing than that kind of environment.