No, and it is one of the few things about this village that requires no caveat. Nothing sits in a river or sea flood zone. Nothing rates high risk on any indicator. No flooding has been recorded here. The village sits on a granite plateau well back from the water, which is the sort of geography that settles the question before the maps are opened.
On river and sea flooding, the Environment Agency's zones cover none of the area. Zero percent of postcodes fall in flood zone 3, the higher-probability band, and zero percent fall in flood zone 2, the additional medium-probability fringe that sits beyond zone 3 rather than inside it. Both bands read the same way here because neither reaches the village at all.
Surface water is the risk that actually matters in most inland places, and it is modest here. On the postcode-level indicators, which fold surface water in alongside rivers and sea, none of the 27 postcodes rates high risk, about 4% rate medium, and roughly 30% rate low on at least one measure. Those bands overlap with the zone figures above rather than adding to them, and the low-risk share is what you would expect anywhere with lanes, fields and a slope: water that runs somewhere it was not intended to after a heavy night.
The forward look does not change the picture. With a climate allowance applied to the flood zones, the share of the area affected remains zero percent, which is unusual and worth noticing. Most places have something that appears once the modelling is pushed out a few decades. St Buryan does not.
For insurance, that is the easy end of the conversation. A property with no flood-zone exposure and no recorded history should not attract a flood loading, and the underwriting questions should be routine rather than a negotiation. The caveat is that insurers price the individual address, not the postcode, so a specific low-lying plot at the bottom of a lane can still surprise someone.
On whether anything stands between the water and the house, the modelled flood extents put zero percent of postcodes in a high-risk area with a defence present in the model and zero percent in a high-risk area without one. There is nothing to defend, which is a better answer than a defence.
Shoreline management is still worth reading for anyone buying with an eye on the coast, because every postcode here falls inside a shoreline management plan, and the policy across all three horizons at twenty, fifty and a hundred years is no active intervention. That means no stated intention to maintain or build defences on that stretch, and it is a policy position rather than a promise in either direction. The nearest coastline sits roughly 2.3 kilometres away at its closest point, with a median of about 2.6 kilometres across the postcodes, so the policy is a question about the cliffs and coves below the parish rather than about the village.
At the nearest tide gauge, at Devonport, sea level rose at a measured rate of about 2.35 millimetres a year across the 1962 to 2015 record. That is a historic measurement over that period, not a projection, and for a village on a plateau several kilometres inland it is context rather than a threat.
No flooding has been recorded in the area at all. That is genuinely reassuring, and it is also not proof that water has never come through a door somewhere in a village that predates record-keeping by a thousand years. The absence of a record is the strongest evidence available, which is not the same as certainty.
Flood risk is where St Buryan is at its most unambiguous: on every published measure, from the flood zones to the climate allowance to the historic record, there is nothing here to worry about.