Would be good to hear the results of this as it makes no sense why it would be disabled for some and not for others.
I have spoken with MB HQ UK and they say it was disabled as a result of an international regulation, UN-79 which had an amendment ( no. 3 ) come into force in January this year. The amendment can be found here
https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2021-02/R079r4am3e.pdf I believe the sensing tech used on the EQC model is less sensitive than that used on other cars and therefore in unable to meet the requirements of this new regulation. Therefore MB decided it was easier to disable than recall and replace the sensor. Other MB vehicles use older more sensitive detectors and therefore meet the requirements of UN-79 amendment 3.
I work in the electronic / electrical industry and I have to work to national and international standards and there is always a period of introduction either the standard is drafted and released with a grace period before coming into force or once enacted a grace period of around 6 months is applied. Normally these regulations are well publicised and major players in the market are engaged in their development. So I find it hard to believe that MB didn't know of this prior to me placing the order in October. Nor did MB or the supplier bother to contact me prior to delivery to inform me of the actions to comply with UN-79 that MB were going to take.
Therefore in my mind the vehicle supplied is not as advertised, interestingly, MB still advertise Partktronic and assistive parting on the MB UK website for the EQC. I have downloaded and kept a copy of the web page and the brochure with the specs listing Parktronic.
Also I have found that the in-car office also is not as advertised so I'll be looking into that as well.