Shoppers say they 'sleep like a dream' on this affordable Dunelm mattress - grab it now for under £140
Dunelm has slashed the price of one of its best-rated mattresses, now reduced to just under £140 for a double. And it's flying off the shelves.
The Fogarty Just Right Memory Foam Top Open Coil Mattress is now 20 per cent off in the big early summer sale at Dunelm. Available at an irresistibly low price, it's topped the bestseller charts for the British home furnishing store. And shoppers are hugely impressed with the quality.
While most memory foam mattresses can go for well over £300, the Dunelm Fogarty Just Right Memory Foam Top Open Coil Mattress is proving to be a hugely popular buy, now priced at £135.20 for a double size.
While nearly half the price of most brand's, the mattress is offering many of the same sleep-boosting credentials but for a fraction of the price.
The open coil mattress has a memory foam top that moulds to your body's shape while the medium support is ideally suited for front and back sleepers. And shoppers are impressed with over 970 reviews and counting.
Available to buy in five sizes, shoppers with all sized beds have found a reason to love the Fogarty Just Right Memory Foam Top Open Coil Mattress.
A standard sprung mattress, also known as an open coil mattress, the Fogarty mattress has one continuous set of springs that works to evenly spread your body weight and reduce the build-up of pressure points.
Better still, the memory foam top is designed to mould around your body contours creating a body-hugging feel. As a result, shoppers have commented on both the comforting and supportive feel.
With edge-to-edge support and an eco-flex filling that adds an extra cushioning layer and hypo allergic fabric to help reduce any allergy triggers, it's no wonder shoppers are hailing this 'great value for money', reporting how they 'sleep like a dream'.
Now on sale, the Fogarty Just Right Memory Foam Top Open Coil Mattress is expectedly selling fast, quickly working its way to the top of Dunelm's bestsellers list.
Now priced at £135.20 for a double and £151.20 for a king, it is exceptionally well priced considering it comes with a ten year guarantee too.
'Sound sleep' wrote one impressed Dunelm shopper. 'Its turned out the best nights sleep that I have for quite some time, and the quality of the mattress is really out standing for the price could not find anything near it really pleased thanks.'
Another agreed, adding: 'Amazing product for the price. I've spent more money on mattresses in the past, with less joy.'
Decent and supportive for under £140, the consensus is that it's well-worth the investment particularly if your mattress is old and starting to sag.
'Considering my previous mattress cost £500, I'm very pleased with the level of comfort and support on this one. I like the inclusion of certified foam.' The Fogarty Just Right Memory Foam Top Open Coil Mattress is now on sale for 20 per cent off while stocks last at Dunelm.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
41 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The healthiest cornflakes (and the ones to avoid)
Back in 1969, Neil Armstrong's one small step for man was fuelled by one big bowl of cornflakes, according to Kellogg's, who sent cubes of their cereal into orbit for his Apollo 11 trip to the moon. The cereal was already a favourite back on firmer ground in Britain, having been a staple on supermarket shelves since 1922 – and it's still going strong today. Around 60 million boxes are produced in the UK every year – and that's for Kellogg's alone. Despite the rise of smashed avocado on toast and fancy Greek yogurt and berries, a bowl of simple cereal remains the go-to breakfast for around a quarter of the population, providing around half of fibre intake for the average adult, according to the latest National Diet and Nutrition Survey. But how healthy is the perennially popular breakfast? 'Cornflakes are generally low in fat and calories and often fortified with vitamins and minerals, such as iron and B vitamins, which is a positive,' says Nichola Ludlam-Raine, a nutritionist and author of How Not to Eat Ultra-Processed (£16.99, Telegraph Books). 'However, they are also fairly low in fibre and protein, and some versions contain added sugars.' Plus not all cornflakes are equal, so it's important to choose your box wisely. It's for this reason that we gathered the nutritional information and ingredients for 10 different types of cornflakes – from the classic Kellogg's to an 88p box from Aldi – and asked our nutritionist to rate them based on their nutritional values. Although each box has near identical calorie counts (from 111 to 118 per 30g portion), as well as fat and protein levels, Ludlam-Raine sifted through the sugar, fibre and salt content to unpick the best from the worst. Skip to: Nestlé Sainsbury's M&S Kellogg's Tesco (Free From) Waitrose Aldi Asda Tesco Lidl 10) Nestlé GoFree Cornflakes The main ingredient in cornflakes is, unsurprisingly, corn, but they also contain barley, which is a source of gluten. This gluten-free option, made without barley, is high in sugar, with 2.6g per 30g portion, making them more sugary than Kellogg's. 'These have the highest sugar content on the list, still fortified and gluten-free, but worth noting if keeping sugar intake low is a priority,' Ludlam-Raine says. 9) Kellogg's The original Kellogg's cornflakes is not the healthiest as it contains 2.4g of sugar per 30g portion (0.7g more than the top-ranked cornflakes). 'It's higher in sugar than supermarket own brands, though well fortified,' Ludlam-Raine notes. It is also one of the highest in salt, with 0.34g per 30g portion. This organic cereal from Sainsbury's contains 0.6g of sugar per 30g portion, around a third of the sugar found in most other own-brand cornflakes. However, as it is organic, it is not fortified, Ludlam-Raine notes. It's a good option if you're trying to reduce your sugar intake but it won't offer the vitamins and minerals that many people are lacking in, such as vitamin D, adds Alison Clark, a registered dietitian and spokesperson for the British Dietetic Association. 7) M&S Only 1 Ingredient Corn Flakes Part of the M&S range made with few ingredients, the one-ingredient cornflakes contain only corn and naturally-occurring sugars. As a result, they are the lowest sugar cornflakes from major supermarkets, with 0.2g per 30g portion. However, their ranking has been nudged down because they are not fortified. 'This option is good if you're specifically looking to avoid sugar, but lacks the micronutrient benefits of fortified options,' Ludlam-Raine says. 6) Tesco Free From Cornflakes This gluten-free option from Tesco has a similar calorie and fat level to standard cornflakes but is higher in sugar (2g per 30g) than most other options. However, it is also higher in fibre (1.2g) and lower in salt (0.08g) than other cornflakes. 'This is a good gluten-free option with moderate sugar content and full fortification – a strong choice for those with dietary needs,' Ludlam-Raine says. 5) Waitrose Waitrose Essential cornflakes contain slightly higher sugar than the option from Aldi (2g per 30g) but have a bit more fibre (0.8g per 30g). 'It is still a reasonable choice with fortification,' she says. 4) Aldi The cornflakes from Aldi contain a slightly higher amount of sugar (1.9g per 30g) and they're also lower in fibre, with 0.5g compared to the 0.8g found in most of the other supermarket own brand versions. 'But the sugar level is still low overall and the cereal is fully fortified,' Ludlame-Raine notes. 3) Asda ' This option from Asda is comparable to other supermarket own-brand offerings, low in sugar (1.8g per 30g) and fully fortified – a good choice,' Ludlam-Raine says. 2) Tesco The cornflakes from Tesco contain slightly more sugar (1.8g per 30g) than the top-ranked cornflakes, but less than most options on this list, with 1.8g per 30g serving. 'This is a good low-sugar option from Tesco, with full fortification,' Ludlam-Raine says. Best overall for health: 1. Lidl It's the Crownfield Corn Flakes from Lidl that come out on top, according to Ludlam-Raine. They are low in sugar, containing 1.7g per 30g portion, she notes. This is the lowest out of all other options, apart from M&S Only 1 Ingredient cornflakes, which are not fortified. As these are fortified with vitamins, they are the best choice. How much should you eat? The portion size listed on the box of cornflakes, and other cereals, is 30g. But pour out your usual bowl and weigh it for a shock about how little 30g is. 'In reality, many adults naturally pour a larger portion (closer to 40–50g),' Ludlam-Raine confirms. In fact, most adults will need more than a 30g portion to not only keep them full but provide enough nutrients, as cornflakes are low in fibre and protein, she explains. 'If you want a larger portion, that's OK, especially if you're quite active – but be mindful of balancing it by adding protein fibre, and healthy fats.' How to boost the healthiness of your cornflakes Obviously, milk is the first addition to start with. Around 150ml to 250ml is a good guide, as it's enough to moisten and cover the flakes, but the exact amount you choose to add depends on preference and if you are drinking more milk later in the day, she notes. Choosing semi-skimmed or whole milk will provide protein and fat to support fullness, or you could try combining your flakes with Greek yoghurt or kefir (a fermented milk drink) for extra protein and gut-friendly probiotics, Ludlam-Raine says. 'Unsweetened fortified plant-based milks (such as soya or pea milk) can also be good options, as they provide protein and contain added calcium and vitamin D (note that organic versions do not have nutrients added),' she says. 'We use fortified oat milk at home.' For toppings, she recommends fresh fruit such as berries, sliced banana or grated apple and pear for extra minerals, fibre and natural sweetness. A small handful of nuts or seeds, for example chia seeds, flaxseeds or almonds, will add even more healthy fat, protein and fibre. It will benefit your health to add these top-up ingredients if you're regularly having cornflakes for breakfast, as, on its own, cornflakes are too low in protein and fibre to keep us sufficiently fuelled for the morning. 'It can be fine as part of a more complete breakfast if you add other foods for example fruit, nuts and kefir,' Ludlam-Raine adds. How do cornflakes compare to other breakfasts? Cornflakes are low in calories and fat, making them healthier than many other types of cereal, like sugar-coated Frosties (which are one-third sugar, containing 11g per serving, compared to the 0.2g to 2.6g in cornflakes) or granola, which despite appearing healthy, are often very high in calories, fat and sugar, Ludlam-Raine says. Saying that, there are healthier cereals. Shredded wheat, for example, has no added sugar and is high in fibre, Ludlam-Raine notes. 'Weetabix too is good as it's high in fibre and fortified with nutrients,' she says. 'These are cereals which can be added to easily too – from different milks to fruits and nuts too.' For a healthier everyday breakfast that isn't cereal, she recommends porridge oats with milk, fruit and seeds; wholegrain toast with nut butter and fruit; Greek yoghurt with fruit, seeds and muesli; and wholegrain cereals with a good fibre content, mixed with fruit and seeds. 'These options provide more lasting energy, better support blood sugar control and help meet your fibre needs, which many people (over 90 per cent) in the UK fall short on,' Ludlam-Raine says. Verdict: Are cornflakes healthy? 'Cornflakes can form part of a healthy breakfast, but on their own they aren't the most balanced choice,' Ludlam-Raine says. 'They are low in fibre and protein, meaning they may not keep you full for very long, which can lead to impulse or excessive snacking later in the morning.' Clark agrees. 'I wouldn't recommend cornflakes as a healthy cereal due to the low fibre content,' she says. While most options are fortified with vitamins, this is the case for most cereals so it doesn't make cornflakes especially healthy, she adds. 'If you enjoy cornflakes, choose those that are fortified with added nutrients,' Ludlam-Raine adds. 'Pair them with a protein source (such as milk or kefir, yoghurt and nuts) and fibre (fruit and seeds),' for an extra health boost.
Telegraph
41 minutes ago
- Telegraph
How Rachel Reeves prioritised growth over Britain's pension savers
When Labour swept to power last year, around half a million pensioners held their breath. Members of the Pension Protection Fund (PPF) and the Financial Assistance Scheme (FAS) had spent years fighting for their full pension entitlement. Months earlier, the Tories had indicated they might finally be restored. The PPF and the FAS step in to pay people's pensions when their defined benefit schemes can no longer afford to, often because a firm has gone bust and cannot afford to keep it running. The increasing costs of such schemes, partly due to increased life expectancy, have also put them under pressure. Over the past 20 years, more than 2,000 schemes have been bailed out. However, the payments members receive are rarely the same as the entitlements they had built up – for some, it isn't even close. Strict rules mean that when a scheme goes bust, anyone who is not already drawing their pension will only be entitled to 90pc of it when they retire. Crucially, payments for any years built up before 1997 also won't rise with inflation, while any after that are capped at just 2.5pc. As a result, some members' pensions never increase, while others fall as low as 50pc of what they should have been. Savers were hoping a Tory intervention would rescue them from retirement poverty while others could have seen six-figure losses reversed as they finally received the full pensions they'd worked decades for. In July 2024, the power to change lives fell into the hands of the Labour party, bringing fresh hope that a battle stretching across two decades could finally be won. Yet 12 months on, Chancellor Rachel Reeves continues to ignore their plight, instead choosing to hand a major financial boost to pension providers in her relentless pursuit of growth. A fortnight ago, she announced plans to tweak rules that would mean they no longer have to pay a multi-million pound levy to sustain the scheme, which has raised £10bn over two decades. Those whose pensions rely on the PPF and FAS called the decision 'shameful', 'morally corrupt' and 'pandering to the industry' as they continue fighting for their full payments. After years of lobbying, campaign groups are animatedly pointing to the £13.7bn in reserves that the PPF now holds. It would cost just £10.1bn to restore the pensions of its 293,000 members, including awarding inflationary increases of up to 5pc and repaying arrears. However, the fund is powerless without a change in legislation. After the election, with hopes growing that Labour would make that change, eyes were keenly trained on the Pension Schemes Bill. When it was published earlier this month, it did contain a major legislative change – but for pension schemes, not members. The Bill gives the PPF greater powers, but only to reduce the levy that pension schemes pay to sustain it. First collected in 2006-07, it has already fallen significantly since its record level of £720m in 2010-11. It now sits at just £45m, and the PPF will soon be able to reduce it to zero. The levy can be reintroduced again if needed. The move will give schemes extra cash at a time when they are being pushed into increasing their UK investment by the Chancellor's recent Mansion House reforms. Saving wealthy pension schemes money when individuals are struggling doesn't sit well with Maurice Alphandary, 70, from Abingdon, near Oxfordshire. He worked as a chemical engineer for AEA Technology, the commercial arm of the UK Atomic Energy Authority, which was privatised before going bust. He now runs the AEA Technology Pensions Campaign, which has spent 13 years fighting to restore pensions. The current PPF rules will cost him around £100,000. He said: 'It just shows how toothless the PPF is in protecting the interests of its members against the Government. The Government can just ride roughshod over them. 'On the one hand, the Government says, 'We really care about our pensioners', but they don't. They're just pandering to the industry and it's a way of just running down the surplus instead of giving to the people who have suffered. There's enough money to compensate us.' His former colleague, 73-year-old Andrew Turner from Abingdon, receives just £18,000 per year from a pension that should pay £29,000. He said: 'For a Labour government who are supposedly focused on those who are less well off, this seems to be exactly the opposite of what they should be doing. 'The question is why should pension companies be rewarded when we're being penalised. If the Government or the PPF had any moral responsibility, it's those who are in greatest need should have first call on this surplus.' The Bill contained no news for the 140,000 FAS members either. With no levy, any changes would be funded by the public purse. David Page, 73, lives in Chelmsford and worked for Bradstock Group, a commercial insurer that went bust in 2003. He only receives around half of the pension he paid for, and is not confident of any progress. He said: 'It still hurts. It's typical of governments. They don't want to spend money. This one will be the world's worst. It's morally corrupt, but morals don't count do they?' Terry Monk, 81, from Camberley in Surrey, also worked for Bradstock. He said the Government's decision to pursue growth with members' money was 'shameful'. He said: 'What they're forgetting, or choosing to ignore, is how that surplus has arisen in the first place and it was a combination of schemes' assets and members' contributions. 'They're trying to get money that they don't own to fund projects. I'm suspicious of the people we have in power at the moment.' For its part, the Government is expected to address retirement poverty in part two of its pensions review. It has already given £1.5bn back to retired miners and is considering handing over £2.3bn more. Ministers have also met with PPF and FAS members to hear their concerns, and accepted it was an 'important issue'. A Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) spokesman said: 'The Government is continuing to consider what we have heard from the PPF and FAS members on this issue.' A PPF spokesman said it welcomed the fresh consideration that the DWP was giving to compensation levels. They added: 'Given our financial strength, we think it's the right time to reduce costs for levy paying schemes and their employers and to consider the levels of indexation we pay our members.'
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Whitehall isn't working – here's how the PM can fix it
It never rains but it pours for Keir Starmer. He is fighting to stop the Iran crisis wrecking his one success as prime minister – a solid performance on foreign affairs in which he somehow maintains a productive relationship with Donald Trump. Insiders tell me Starmer's efforts are aimed at persuading Iran to enter meaningful talks on its nuclear programme and then convincing a highly sceptical US president that Iran is serious about negotiations. But if Trump goes ahead with his threat to bomb Iran, Starmer's special relationship with him could conceivably be stretched to breaking point. The prime minister can't escape his woes on domestic matters. His intense diplomacy was interrupted on Thursday by the unwelcome news that Vicky Foxcroft had resigned as a whip in protest at the government's cuts to disability benefits. She might not be the last to quit a government post before the crunch vote on £5bn of welfare cuts on 1 July, when Starmer faces the biggest Labour revolt of his premiership. Some parliamentary aides to ministers are on resignation watch. The government's robotic response to Foxcroft's departure, which failed to acknowledge her respected work as shadow disabilities minister before last year's election, angered some Labour MPs. Many will rebel with a heavy heart. They accept the need to reduce the ballooning welfare budget, but think the panicky cuts ahead of Rachel Reeves's spring statement symbolise how the government repeatedly reacts to events – in this case, living from hand to mouth to stick within the chancellor's fiscal rules – instead of having a long-term reform strategy. For some Whitehall-watchers, Starmer will not improve matters unless he reforms the centre of government. Critics think the relationship between No 10 and the Cabinet Office isn't working, leaving the other side of the triangle, the Treasury, to call the shots. The result: the winter fuel allowance catastrophe and now the welfare rebellion. Even some in Downing Street admit privately a shake-up is needed. Sam Freedman, a former special adviser and author of an excellent book, Failed State, suggests loosening the Treasury's grip by forming an Office of Budget Management, run jointly by the Treasury and Downing Street, which would oversee future spending reviews to ensure they reflect the PM's priorities. Freedman believes Starmer should consider a change Tony Blair introduced in his second term, which improved public service delivery. To prevent the whole operation being sucked into reacting to events, three units focused on different timescales: a policy unit on day-to-day oversight of Whitehall departments; a delivery unit on a small number of the PM's priorities (in Starmer's case, that would be his five missions); and a strategy unit on difficult long-term challenges. This ensured a more strategic state. One problem today is that the 'missions delivery unit' is based in the Cabinet Office rather than No 10. The Institute for Government (IFG) think tank has made a sensible proposal to abolish the Cabinet Office and set up an expanded 'Office of the Prime Minister', which would then take charge of the missions. Do such structures really matter? Yes. They are even more important when a PM makes a virtue out of his pragmatism and lack of ideology, as Starmer does. Like many predecessors, Starmer complains the Whitehall machine is slow to crank into life when he demands action. Often fair – but civil servants also have a point when they grumble that this government does not give them clear enough marching orders. For example, the government's own commitment to Starmer's missions – later relaunched as six milestones in his 'plan for change' – is now being questioned in Whitehall. Ministers promised the missions would be the 'guiding star' of the government-wide spending review unveiled by Reeves last week, and that cabinet ministers would collaborate on cross-departmental working and budgets. Only one problem: there was little money to go round. So the review again became a trial of strength between the Treasury and individual ministers trying to protect their departments. Starmer's 'mission-driven government' was caught in the crossfire and some Whitehall officials think the idea suffered serious damage. The IFG calculates that two of the missions – on economic growth and clean energy – did well out of the spending review, but the other three – on health, safer streets and opportunity – look difficult to achieve. Another reason why the missions matter is that this government doesn't have the option of pumping in extra cash to secure the improvements to public services voters want, as Blair and Gordon Brown enjoyed. Although Reeves won headlines for her big boost to building projects, her squeeze on day-to-day budgets is viewed in Whitehall as a 'standstill settlement'. So reform and efficiency savings will be needed to secure tangible improvements – not least in the NHS. The missions can play a part in prioritising these goals. With many public services still struggling in the voters' eyes, standing still will not win Labour a second term.
