In Beckenstein v. Potter & Carrier, Inc., 191 Conn. 150, 163, 464 A.2d 18 (1982), the plaintiffs contracted for the construction of a building. Shortly after it was constructed, the roof began to leak, a fact of which the plaintiffs were aware. Id., 154. A number of attempts were made to repair the roof, and an action was not commenced until the statute of limitations had expired. Id., 160. The general superintendent of the project "also testified that when he went up on the roof in the winter of early 1969, he observed blisters, cracks and canting of the roof. There was not a failure to warn the plaintiffs because they admit that they were already aware of the problem. In their brief, the plaintiffs argue that they were not told the 'main problem' of the roof's failure until 1974. . . . The problem with this argument is that the statute refers to the 'date when the injury was first sustained,' not the date when the cause of the injury was first determined." Id., 162.