Rising

Hopefully they will be understanding, as it's only 2 days late right now. I would also give them a phone call today in addition to the email though. They might not see the email until awhile later!!

To echo Fuzzylogician, this isn't really about your application specifically- the email says that it's not normal for them to offer funding to MA students. 
The fact that some students get it show they are the exception that proves the rule, rather than them being leverage that you can use to get yourself funding. You didn't get refused funding- it's just not part of the normal package, and they weren't able to find any to tack on to your package.

If nothing in your circumstances changed, it's hard to imagine that the decision will change. You can try, but I'd be surprised if it worked. MAs are often a main source of revenue for these universities, and funding is limited. 

I feel that rising_star's comment is unnecessarily harsh. Being rejected doesn't mean you are a weak candidate. Lots of factors go into admissions, and "fit" is way more important than we realize. Schools get lots of applications for only a handful of spots--many "top candidates" are rejected simply because there aren't enough spots. Without knowing your stats, experiences, and interests (I'm not asking for them, btw), it's hard to say anything about your fit with a certain program or if you maybe haven't done something a program prefers (like a master's or something). Being rejected from one program doesn't mean you'll be rejected from another, unless you are underprepared for graduate school. You can always contact a school and ask if there's an approximate time applicants should hear back--unless they have stated this on their site or in a previous email. Good luck! This process is very stressful. 

Hi,
I am in the same boat as you. I am planning on submitting my application for the same program on Jan 20. In my opinion, you are a very competitive candidate. Your GPA is slightly above the minimum requirement for this course, so no problems there. You have spent some time at Oxford, so they do know you. I think your chances look pretty good actually.
Just out of curiosity, have you applied to any university in the US? With your profile, I think you might be able to get in most (not to say all) of the Russian/Eastern European programs. 

Hello speechbeach,
I am not an expert in your field nor in the admission procedures, however, if it would make you feel better, I am applying to Harvard with a mediocre V/Q/AWA scores. I realize my GRE scores are not very impressive but I am confident that there's more than that. I am confident that the admission committee will be able to appreciate the rest of my application. Every person has strong sides, just try to highlight yours. =)  I am sorry if this post is a bit vague, I hope someone from your field will be able to share his views on this and will be more helpful than me.
Good luck and try to remain optimistic!

Sorry for spamming but... really no one? :/

Just to check: Are you at a school like Cambridge/Oxford or other UK school where a tutor is a person hired to do research and provide small group tutorials/teaching to supplement the students' instruction from professors? If so, then I think this person would be a good LOR writer and able to speak to your ability better than some of the professors because she knows you a lot better.
However, it's useful to note that in North America, a tutor is usually someone unrelated to the University (**they may be another student or a graduate student but they are working as a private service, not part of the University) and a person that you pay (usually by the hour) to help you catch up on classwork. So if this is the case, then I think the tutor is not an appropriate choice for a letter. Even if this is not the case, I would make sure I know this is the meaning most North Americans will associate with "tutor" so I'd avoid using that title in your application to refer to this person.
Overall, I think the only person I would say you should strike off this list is #3. Most schools ask for 3 letters so I would pick the three out of the remaining five that knows you the best. If you are allowed to submit more than 3, then you could consider that too. Out of the five though, I would say #4 might be the least helpful as you say they might not remember you and they taught you an introductory first year class rather than an upper level class.

I cannot say for sure in case there are differences between our fields, but I never considered the (sub)field of my letter writers when selecting them. I always went for the ones that can speak the strongest about my research and academic abilities. For example, when I was applying for my Masters in Astronomy, I just picked three former research advisors. My intended area of research was in planet formation, and I had letter writers from medical physics, extragalactic astronomy, and asteroid science**. Of course, all three of them were physicists/astronomers of some kind---but I didn't worry that they were not directly in my region of interest. At some level research/academic ability is research/academic ability and it doesn't matter if I learned it while in a medical physics group or an astronomy group!
(** For my PhD applications, I switched the medical physics letter (also the weakest) out for my Masters letter. My PhD application is to work on exoplanets, which doesn't really fit in the same subfields either, though!)

No, it won't, especially since that professor has valuable things to say about your academic potential.