What is the effect of fraudulent concealment on an owner's cause of action for conversion?

While an owner's cause of action accrues when the conversion occurs even if the owner is ignorant of the wrong committed (Rose v. Dunk-Harbison Co. (1935) 7 Cal.App.2d 502, 505, 46 P.2d 242), fraudulent concealment provides an exception to the general rule: "This rule ... is not absolute; for example, where there has been a fraudulent concealment of the facts the statute of limitations does not commence to run until the aggrieved party discovers or ought to have discovered the existence of the cause of action for conversion. [Citations.]" (Bennett v. Hibernia Bank (1956) 47 Cal.2d 540, 561, 305 P.2d 20.)