Can a buyer be forced to close even if they have doubts about something they can't quite prove?

Generally, yes, if the buyer can't point to an actual unsatisfied condition or an actual breach — a vague, unproven suspicion that something might be wrong isn't itself a legal basis to refuse closing, and a buyer who refuses to close on nothing more than a hunch risks being found in breach of the agreement, exposing it to the seller's remedies for a failed closing.

This is exactly why well-drafted purchase agreements build in mechanisms to convert a buyer's doubt into something concrete and actionable before closing — the right to conduct due diligence, the ability to require specific representations and warranties the buyer can rely on, and closing conditions that let the buyer walk away if a defined, objective threshold is actually met. A buyer with a genuine but unproven concern is generally better served by using diligence, direct questions, and a properly worded MAC or bring-down condition to surface the issue before closing, rather than hoping vague doubt alone will justify refusing to complete the deal.

If you're a buyer with real concerns you can't yet substantiate, that's worth raising directly and getting assessed by a Treadstone business lawyer well before your scheduled closing date, not on the day itself.