Final answer:
The trigger facts mentioned point towards potential contractual fraud, which is likely to occur in situations of asymmetric or imperfect information where one party has less knowledge than the other about the transaction.
Step-by-step explanation:
The examples provided, such as intentional mistakes, hurried signatures, no copies of the contract, ambiguous terminology ('application' vs. 'contract'), a relationship of trust, concerning timing, and skepticism regarding the sales process, are potentially indicative of contractual fraud. In situations where information is asymmetric, meaning one party has more knowledge than the other, the potential for fraud increases.
Instances of contractual fraud often involve situations where the buyer or seller is uncertain about the specifics of what they are transacting, can lead to imbalances in the deal, and ultimately result in economic harm. Mechanisms are sometimes put in place to mitigate these risks and encourage confidence in transactions despite the presence of imperfect information.
Buyers, sellers, employers, and lenders face risks when dealing with imperfect information. They may institute various methods like warranties, brand names, and screening processes to reduce the likelihood of fraud. However, when red flags such as those listed are present, this can trigger suspicion and warrant closer scrutiny to avoid falling victim to fraudulent activity in economic transactions.