In Jensen v. Royal Pools (1975) 48 Cal.App.3d 717, an unincorporated association brought suit seeking damages for a defective communally owned swimming pool. Subsequently, a "spotted calf" case was decided in which it was held that an unincorporated association lacked standing to sue. Thereupon, the plaintiffs in Jensen sought leave, although the statute of limitations had run, to file a suit designating proper parties plaintiff. Leave was granted and the appellate court affirmed the trial court. Quoted with approval in Jensen is the statement in Austin v. Massachusetts Bonding & Insurance Co. (1961) 56 Cal.2d 596, 600: "'The modern rule with respect to actions involving parties designated by their true names in the original complaint is that, where an amendment is sought after the statute of limitations has run, the amended complaint will be deemed filed as of the date of the original complaint provided recovery is sought in both pleadings on the same general set of facts. This rule is the result of a development which, in furtherance of the policy that cases should be decided on their merits, gradually broadened the right of a party to amend a pleading without incurring the bar of the statute of limitations.'" ( Jensen v. Royal Pools, supra, 48 Cal.App.3d at p. 720.) In short, an unincorporated corporation consisting of condominium owners sued a builder for constructing a defective swimming pool. After the complaint was filed, the association lost standing due to a change in law. The complaint was amended to substitute two condominium owners, individually and as representatives of a class of condominium owners, in place of the association. (Id. at p. 720.) The appellate court held that the amended complaint related back to the original complaint, as the factual allegations remained the same, and no new cause of action was asserted. (Id. at pp. 720, 723.)