Yes, in the way that never shows up on the famous map. No part of the village sits in the river or sea flood zones. About one postcode in seven still flags high risk on at least one measure. The water that threatens a house here falls out of the sky and runs down a slope rather than arriving along a channel. Rivers get the headlines. Drainage does the damage.
The Environment Agency's river-and-sea mapping puts 0% of the area's postcodes in flood zone 3 and 0% in flood zone 2. Those two are separate bands rather than nested rings: zone 2 is the additional medium-probability fringe lying beyond zone 3, so a small zone 2 figure never means a bigger zone 3 is hiding inside it. Here both come back empty, and on rivers and tidal water that is a clean result.
A clean result on that measure answers one question and leaves another open. Zone maps describe watercourses and the sea. They say nothing about rain landing on a hillside, running off fields and hard surfaces, and reaching a front door with nowhere left to go. In a village strung along the flank of a hill, that is the mechanism worth thinking about, and it belongs to the postcode-level indicators rather than the zone maps.
Apply the climate allowance and the picture holds: the climate-adjusted share of postcodes in the river-and-sea zones is still 0%. Whatever else changes, the forward look on rivers and tidal water does not move the answer here.
For insurance, an empty flood zone is the response underwriters want and the box most quote engines actually tick. Surface water is where a quote can still turn awkward, because it tends to emerge when a search is ordered or a previous claim is disclosed rather than when the postcode is first typed in. Getting an indicative quote before instructing a solicitor costs nothing and occasionally changes a decision.
Across the 46 postcodes covered here, about 15% rate high on at least one flood measure, about 11% medium and about 39% low. At least one measure is the phrase to hold on to, since it folds surface water in alongside rivers and sea. Those bands overlap the zone figures rather than sitting next to them, so adding the two sets together produces a number that means nothing.
On the modelled flood extents, 0% of postcodes sit in a high-risk extent with a defence present in the model, and 0% sit in one without. Nothing here stands behind a defence, for the straightforward reason that nothing here falls inside the extent. Where a defence does show up in that model elsewhere, it records that a structure exists, not that the house behind it is safe.
The nearest long-running tide gauge is at Devonport, where sea level rose at about 2.35 millimetres a year across a record running from 1962 to 2015. That is a measured historic rate at the coast rather than a projection, and an inland village on a hill is a long way down the list of places it reaches.
No historic flooding is recorded for the area, with 0% of postcodes carrying a recorded historic flood extent. That is worth something, and it describes what has been mapped and reported rather than proving that no cellar here has ever taken water.
Of everything this page measures, flooding is where Stoke-sub-Hamdon comes off worst, and the reason is the gap between the two maps: the one everybody checks comes back clear, while roughly one postcode in seven still rates high on another measure entirely. Ask about surface water specifically, because nobody in the chain will volunteer it.