Yes, and it is the one genuinely bad number on this page. More than a third of the village's postcodes flag high risk on at least one flood measure. About one in twenty sits in the highest river flood zone. The coast is seven kilometres away and has nothing to do with any of it. Lanivet sits in a valley, and a valley is where water goes when it has finished with everywhere else.
Start with rivers and the sea, because that is what the formal zones cover. Across the village's 19 postcodes, the Environment Agency's mapping puts 5% in flood zone 3, the highest-probability band, and 11% in zone 2. Those are exclusive bands rather than nested ones: zone 2 is the additional medium-probability fringe lying beyond zone 3, not a wrapper that contains it. So they are separate postcodes, not the same ones counted twice.
Neither zone says anything about surface water, which is the rain arriving faster than the ground and the drains can absorb it. The zone maps model watercourses and tidal water only. In a village strung along a valley with lanes feeding down into it, the water that never reaches a river is its own category of problem, and it turns up in the broader postcode indicators rather than in the zone figures.
With a climate allowance applied, the share of postcodes inside the modelled river-and-sea zones rises to 16%. That is a forward look at the same geography under higher flows, not a prediction about any particular winter.
For insurance, this matters at the address rather than the village. Insurers price the postcode and increasingly the individual property, so two houses a few hundred metres apart in Lanivet can get very different quotes and very different flood excesses. Flood Re exists to make cover obtainable for high-risk homes, but it does not cover homes built since 2009, and it does not cover everything a flooded household loses. Get an indicative quote before instructing a solicitor, not after.
Taking every measure together, including surface water, 37% of the village's postcodes rate high on at least one indicator, 21% medium and 37% low. Those bands overlap with the zone figures rather than adding to them: a postcode in zone 3 also sits inside that 37%.
Counted as homes rather than postcodes, which is the more useful unit, the Environment Agency's rivers-and-sea mapping lists 181 properties across the 8 Lanivet postcodes that carry any risk at all. Of those, 28 are at high risk, 3 at medium and 17 at low, and 24 of the high-risk properties are residential. Postcodes carrying no risk do not appear in that mapping, so 181 is not the village's housing stock. It is the exposed part of it.
Then the question the flood maps usually dodge, which is whether anything stands between the water and the house. Of the village's postcodes, 5% sit inside a modelled high-risk extent with no defence present, and 5% inside a high-risk extent where a defence is present in the model. A further 16% sit within a low-risk undefended extent. Defended is a modelling label, not an assurance: it means the model knows a structure is there. It does not mean the structure is maintained, that it is rated for the event that arrives, or that your specific property sits behind it.
Every one of the village's postcodes falls within a shoreline management plan area, even at seven kilometres inland. The stated policy is hold the line over the next twenty years, moving to managed realignment over the fifty and hundred year horizons. A policy is an intention to maintain or to step back from defences over that period. It is not a defence, and it is not a guarantee that the intention survives the next funding round.
At the nearest tide gauge, Devonport, the measured record from 1962 to 2015 shows sea level rising at about 2.35 millimetres a year. That is a historic rate over a real record rather than a projection, and it is context for the shoreline policy rather than a direct threat to a village this far up the valley.
One genuinely reassuring fact: no part of Lanivet falls inside a recorded historic flood outline. Nothing here has been formally logged as having flooded. That is worth having, and it is not proof that nothing ever has, because recorded outlines only capture what was mapped and reported.
Flooding is the weakest thing about Lanivet by a distance, and it is the reason to do address-level homework rather than village-level homework. Put the exact property into the Environment Agency's long-term flood risk service before you make an offer, because the difference between the safe two-thirds of this village and the exposed part of it is measured in metres.