Not on the published mapping, no. None of the village sits in the river-and-sea flood zones. Nothing here falls inside a recorded historic flood extent. A small share of postcodes flag on the broader indicators, and that flagging is about water off roads and fields rather than a river coming for the front door. This is the boring answer, and on flooding boring is what you want.
Take the river-and-sea mapping first, because that is the part conveyancers and insurers look at. The Environment Agency's flood zones cover none of Willand: zero percent of postcodes sit in zone 3, the higher-probability band, and zero percent in zone 2, which is the additional medium-probability fringe lying beyond zone 3 rather than a wrapper containing it. Both bands being empty means no watercourse in the modelling is projected to reach the built-up part of the village. That is unusual enough to be worth saying out loud.
Which leaves surface water, and in a place with no flood-zone land, surface water is the only flooding most owners will ever meet. It is rain arriving faster than drains, gullies and field edges can move it, and it does not care whether a river is nearby. The data behind this page does not publish a surface-water-only share for Willand; it folds surface water in with the other indicators at postcode level, which is the figure below. What it does mean in practice is that the risk here is about topography, drainage and whoever last cleared the ditch, not about the Culm bursting its banks.
Looking forward, the climate-adjusted zone share puts about 1% of the area's postcodes inside a flood zone once the Environment Agency's climate allowance is applied. That is a small number and a real one. It is the mapping's way of saying the margin here is comfortable rather than infinite.
For insurance, a property with no flood-zone designation and no recorded flood history is the straightforward case. Cover is normally available on ordinary terms and flooding is unlikely to be the thing that moves the premium. Insurers price the address, though, not the village, so a house at the bottom of a slope with a surface-water flag will be quoted differently from one two streets up. Get an indicative quote on the specific address before you instruct a solicitor rather than after.
At postcode level, across the 98 postcodes covered, about 3% rate high on at least one flood measure, roughly 7% rate medium and around 33% rate low. Those bands include surface water alongside rivers and sea, so they overlap with the zone figures rather than adding to them. A postcode can rate high on one indicator while sitting nowhere near a flood zone, which is exactly what is happening in the small number that flag here.
On defences, the modelling shows no postcodes inside a high-risk extent at all, defended or undefended. There is no defended share here because there is nothing behind a defence, which is a cleaner position than being protected by an embankment somebody has to maintain.
Sea level does not bear on Willand directly. The village is inland, and the nearest tide gauge with a long record is at Devonport, where measurements between 1962 and 2015 show a rise of roughly 2.4 millimetres a year. That is a measured historic rate over that record, not a forecast, and its relevance here is regional context rather than a threat to any doorstep in the village.
No historic flooding is recorded in the area. That is genuinely reassuring, and it is also a record of what has been logged rather than proof that no cellar in Willand has ever taken water. Absence of a record is good news, not a guarantee.
Flooding is one of the things you can largely stop worrying about in Willand. Check the specific address for surface water, then spend your survey money on the roof.