Shoppers say 'bargain' as they snap up Dunelm 'stylish' and 'affordable' sofa set
Dunelm shoppers have been left impressed by a 'stylish' garden furniture set that they claim is more affordable than similar options at other retailers. Plus, for those who want it quickly, Dunelm promises fast delivery and says it is ideal for anyone with limited outdoor space.
The Rattan Sofa Lounger Set from Dunelm has been hailed as a "real bargain", that is both "stylish" and "ideal for small spaces". This set features a three-seater sofa, a coffee table and a footstool that can also serve as extra seating.
Dunelm claims the 'spacious' three-seater sofa, just short of 190cm in length, strikes "the perfect balance of comfort and functionality. "The retailer's website goes on to add: "The rattan design brings a modern and cohesive look to your garden, blending seamlessly with various styles of decor.
"Ideal for lounging in the sun or entertaining guests, the thick, supportive cushions ensure maximum comfort, while the table's tempered glass top adds a polished finish." Further praise was shared in the review section where Dunelm shoppers had their say on the set, reports the Mirror.
People might be extra keen to upgrade their outdoor spaces ahead of a forecasted 27C mini-heatwave, with discounted garden furniture available at many retailers. The Range is offering a 5-Piece Sofa Set for £349.99, down from £399.99, while Homebase has an Alexandria Natural 3 Seater Rattan Wicker Outdoor Corner Sofa for £249.99, discounted from £349.99.
Dunelm's Rattan Sofa Lounger Set has received rave reviews, with one customer saying: "Great outdoor sofa. It's not too big and fits in the space lovely. Super comfy cushions and the footrest can be in any of the three positions. Great value for money." Another added: "It's just perfect for my small garden. My son put it together, and it was all straightforward."
However, not all shoppers were satisfied. One claimed: "The furniture wasn't as light coloured as in the picture but all in all I was happy with it. Like another reviewer mentioned, a little shallow in depth too, meaning an adult can feel like they're perching on the edge of it."
Another told fellow Dunelm shoppers: "I really wanted to like this rattan sofa set, but unfortunately, it's just not comfortable. The cushions are the biggest issue – they're overfilled, made from a shiny, slippery material that slides around constantly.
"You can't sit down without everything moving out of place, and they feel hard rather than plush. With the cushions on, the seat area becomes too shallow – it actually feels like you're almost slipping off the edge. I'm only 5 foot and even I can't fully stretch my legs out when using the footstool, so it definitely wouldn't work for taller people."
However, many were quick to praise the set, with a few having recently bought their furniture to make the most of UK summertime. A reviewer wrote: "We love this set. It's so comfortable and looks great. A real bargain!".
And, someone else agreed, adding: "Lovely set very stylish and easy to put together I did it on my own within a couple of hours! Would highly recommend. The cushions are well made and deep very comfy."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Record
2 hours ago
- Daily Record
What DWP's 'Data Surveillance' policy means for Universal Credit claimants
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has confirmed new powers will soon allow officials to request bank details from Universal Credit claimants. The DWP has released a statement in response to questions regarding "data surveillance" of Universal Credit claimants. MP Angus MacDonald raised a written question in parliament, enquiring whether the DWP had evaluated "the potential impact of data surveillance on recipients of Universal Credit". In his response, DWP minister Andrew Western clarified: "No assessment has been made as the DWP does not currently or have any plans to use data surveillance to regulate, police or monitor the actions of individuals or groups in receipt of benefits." However despite these assurances, legislation is progressing through parliament that would empower DWP investigators with new authority to access banking information, including that of Universal Credit recipients, reports the Mirror. The proposed measures aim to curb errors and fraud within the benefit system by enabling officials to demand that banks disclose details about the accounts of benefit recipients, such as those on Universal Credit, Employment and Support Allowance, and Pension Credit. This data will be utilised to verify the eligibility of benefit recipients for their payments. There's potential for these powers to extend to other benefits as well. The bill also proposes provisions for officials to directly withdraw funds from an individual's bank account if they owe money to the DWP and are not cooperating with repayment demands. In cases where these powers are used, investigators will need to request a minimum of three months' bank statements for the relevant account, to ensure the individual has sufficient funds. The person must receive at least 28 days' notice to provide them an opportunity to clear the debt before money is withdrawn from their account. MPs have recently passed a bill to implement significant changes to Universal Credit payments. The law will ensure that the standard allowance increases at least in line with inflation each year, from 2026/27 to 2029/30. However, there will be reductions to the additional amounts you can receive if you have a health condition that impacts your capacity to work. Here are the current rates for the monthly Universal Credit standard allowance:
North Wales Live
13 hours ago
- North Wales Live
Lego's portable toy perfect for school summer holidays now £2 with little-known deal
The school summer holidays are upon us, with exciting days out and trips away around the corner. Families embarking on thrilling adventures will want to ensure their little ones are entertained while away from home, and Lego has the perfect solution. The Creative Suitcase, consisting of 213 pieces, is the ultimate portable toy that children can take on long journeys and holidays. The charming plastic suitcase features multiple compartments filled with a variety of different coloured bricks, wheels, shapes and more in various sizes for kids to construct their own creations. This includes vehicles, animals and buildings, with the limitless possibilities encouraging children to explore their own creative building skills. The suitcase typically costs £17.99, however a handy TopCashback deal allows shoppers to grab it for as little as £2.20. New members who sign up to the money-saving site for free will receive a £15 cashback bonus that they can use at Lego, reducing the cost of the suitcase to only £2.20. Existing TopCashback members can also save a little, bringing the price down to £17.20. As reported by the Mirror, the Creative Suitcase isn't just for children, with Lego stating it's designed for 'ages four to 99'. It would make the ideal starter set for anyone entering the world of Lego, and is also a fantastic way to add pieces to one's ever-expanding collection. For those looking to keep the kids entertained over the school holidays with more building sets, Amazon has a deal on a similar Classic Building Bricks Set for Kids costing £12.34. This set includes 1,200 pieces in various colours and sizes, suitable for children aged six and up. If you prefer shopping at Argos, they offer the Chad Valley PlaySmart Wooden Block Set for £10, appropriate for little ones 12 months and older. It comes with 80 blocks and is designed to enhance children's understanding of shapes, colours, and sizes. The Creative Suitcase has earned an impressive 4.5-star rating on the Lego website. A thrilled customer remarked: "Great for budding builders. I bought this set for my son who turned four this year. This was his first Lego set and he really enjoyed building basic builds with it. It enhances the creativity of a young builder, great value for the money. I'm happy with the purchase." Another person shared their experience: "I bought this as a present for my nephew and he was playing with all the Lego pieces for hours. It was great to see him building different things and never getting bored. The instructions are easy to read and it's fun for the whole family. I highly recommend this." One Lego customer was left feeling slightly let down by the Creative Suitcase, sharing: "Great selection of pieces inside to build many different things, but the box that they come in could be better. The red locks pop off easy and the dividers on the inside slide out easily, as well. Buy for the pieces, not the box." Another Lego enthusiast, however, was over the moon, commenting: "Great choice for a kid you are just introducing to Lego building. It lets them see what can be done in various ways before graduating to more skilled things." Another person added: "We ordered this to have as spare pieces. It's super cute and can be used to travel with Lego." To grab the Creative Suitcase for only £2.20, new members can join TopCashback for free here. Search for 'Lego', click 'Get Cashback Now', then shop as normal and checkout on the Lego website. The cashback should track and show up in the TopCashback account within seven working days of purchase. Once Lego has paid the commission to TopCashback, the £15 cashback will become payable and can be withdrawn and spent.
Telegraph
a day ago
- Telegraph
Starmer and the EU are still trying to punish Britain for Brexit
We are reaching the scorched earth stage. Labour senses that it will lose the next election. The EU senses it, too. So both sides have decided to lock the UK into its subordinate status, to sign 'Farage-proof' agreements that future governments will struggle to unpick. The Telegraph has seen the texts on agriculture and energy policy that Sir Keir Starmer agreed in May. No wonder the PM was reluctant to get into specifics. Britain has accepted permanent and unilateral EU control of its food and energy regulations. Worse, it is agreeing to pay for the privilege of being slapped about. The ins and outs of the deals, unlike Starmer's soft-soap salesmanship at the time, are brutal. We are to become the EU's helots. 'Neither agreement should give the United Kingdom the right to participate in the Union's decision-making,' the text proclaims, without diplomatic niceties. Yet, at the same time: 'The United Kingdom should contribute financially to supporting the relevant costs associated with the Union's work in these policy areas. This includes financial contribution to inter alia the functioning of the relevant Union agencies, systems and databases.' To see how abusive the relationship is, try to picture it the other way around. Imagine a British Government insisting that trade with the EU is contingent on Brussels making financial transfers to the Treasury; that disputes will be arbitrated by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom; that Brussels must label its goods to avoid leakage into Northern Ireland; that British fishermen should have access to EU waters; that the EU might be allowed to defend British interests militarily, but only if it pays for the privilege; that any change in future British regulations will automatically be shadowed on the Continent. Such things are, of course, unimaginable. British Euro-fanatics maintain that this asymmetry simply reflects the difference in the size of our economies, but that is nonsense. We are the sixth-largest economy in the world, for Heaven's sake, and we are accepting terms that far smaller EU trading partners would not countenance. Indeed, nowhere else in the world are trade deals dependent on the deliberate subjection of one of the contracting parties. Australia and New Zealand have perhaps the most comprehensive trade agreement on the planet, but it would not occur to either side that the Kiwis should make budgetary transfers or hand over their fishing grounds as a participation fee. Talking of which, New Zealand has a mutual recognition deal on agrifoods with the EU of a kind not uncommon among developed economies. Each side agrees to trust the other's regulators. If a consignment of Danish bacon is approved by local inspectors, that is good enough for the Kiwis, and vice versa. There was no reason for the EU not to have a similar deal with Britain, whose food standards were not simply compatible with its own, but identical. But Eurocrats were feeling vindictive. They wanted to punish us for the referendum. More than this, they fretted that, if Britain was allowed to opt out of the more unscientific and onerous Brussels regulations, it might import food from the rest of the world. It might, for example, go back to buying its beef from Australia and Canada rather than Ireland and France. So Eurocrats demanded 'dynamic alignment' (an odd phrase, few things being less dynamic than the EU). They insisted that the UK should not simply meet EU standards when selling to the EU, but should impose them domestically. And they insisted that the deal should be open-ended, so that future changes in those regulations would be automatically applied in Britain. The last Government was having none of it. It was well aware of the statistics. EU food exports to the UK were worth around four times as much as the reverse. And many British exports were in categories where safety checks did not apply: Scotch whisky, for example. It was Brussels that was, in diplomatic parlance, the demander here. The UK buys around £40 billion of EU food each year – a quarter of everything Europe exports. We take twice as much as the EU's next biggest customer (the US), and four times as much as the one after that (China). If Brussels wanted a New Zealand-style mutual recognition deal, said the Conservative Government, great; but the idea that Britain would invite foreign officials to regulate its domestic food standards was a non-starter. Then came Starmer and everything changed. The hapless Labour leader was not interested in cost-benefit analyses. Rather, he approached the EU in the spirit of a mediaeval penitent, a man who wanted the sin of Brexit to be scourged from him. Deep down, he shared the European view that his country deserved to pay a price. So he reversed the previous Government's position and invited Brussels to tell him what to do. More than this, he agreed to pay for it. As the text spells out: 'The United Kingdom should bear appropriate costs for participation in the common sanitary and phytosanitary area and for the implementation of the agreement to link the United Kingdom and the Union's greenhouse emissions trading systems.' In exchange for what? Insults, chiefly. Again, try to imagine it the other way around. Imagine that, at every summit with a European leader, the British began by saying how wrong the other country was to allow its laws to be set abroad. 'I deplore Germany's decision to hand over its democracy to unelected Brussels functionaries, but I accept the decision of the German electorate.' You can't, can you? Yet we barely notice any more when European leaders say, as the German Chancellor Friedrich Merz did at his summit with Starmer this week: 'The UK, and I personally deplore this deeply, decided to leave the European Union.' The reason he gets away with it, of course, is that Starmer agrees. So, indeed, does the Cabinet. The Europhile think-tank, UK in a Changing Europe, writes quarterly reports monitoring the extent of divergence between Britain and the EU. Its latest, published last week, finds an unprecedented degree of alignment across 21 areas including energy policy, fisheries, trade, energy and competition. The few areas in which Britain had been diverging – the freedom to grow precision crops, for example – are being brought into line. Leftists often have a false idea of what conservatives believe, and Labour came to office genuinely convinced that the Tories were rejecting collaboration with the EU out of xenophobia. As a Number 10 spokesman told this newspaper last week: 'The Tory method was making bad choices because they were stuck in the ideological treacle of the past. We're not going to continue that.' The truth – that Britain had pushed for close economic relations and had baulked only at the Carthaginian terms demanded by the other side – never entered Labour heads. Thinking that they were putting pragmatism above ideology, Labour accepted the EU's terms, to the incredulity of Brussels functionaries, who are now rushing to lock the deal in permanently. Britain's paltry asks – easier access for touring artists, equivalence for our financial services companies – were dropped during the talks. The sole claimed victory – the use of e-gates for British passport holders, something the EU could have done at any time, as Britain does for EU passports – turned out not to have been agreed. On the other hand, Brussels got absolutely everything it wanted, from guarantees against British competition and a UK defence commitment down to a British agreement to subsidise the university fees of EU students, something that matters enormously to the children of Eurocrats (Eurobrats, as it were). It was an EU clean sweep. So long, and thanks for all the fish. I suppose there is one silver lining. When, as seems inevitable, Labour's fiscal incontinence brings a full-scale financial crisis, not even the #FBPE halfwits will be able to blame Brexit.
